GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH, EVERYONE, AND GOOD
MORNING. IT'S GREAT TO HAVE YOU
ALL HERE. THIS IS THE ASSEMBLY
BUDGET SUBCOMMITTEE NUMBER THREE
ON EDUCATION, FINANCE AND THE
ASSEMBLY EDUCATION COMMITTEE.
I'M CHAIR OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE.
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DAVID ALVAREZ
AND I AM REALLY PLEASED TO BE
JOINED BY THE CHAIR OF OUR
EDUCATION COMMITTEE, ASSEMBLYMAN
MURATSUCHI. IT'S BEEN 12 YEARS
SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA.
CALIFORNIA'S WEIGHTED STUDENT
FUNDING FOR ALL OF OUR SCHOOLS.
AND AFTER A DECADE OF
IMPLEMENTATION, THE STATE IS DUE
FOR OVERSIGHT FOR THIS
FOUNDATIONAL EDUCATION FINANCE
FORMULA. QUESTIONS THAT COME TO
MIND ARE IS LCF'S FISCAL FORMULA
SERVING THE Kò VALUES?
CALIFORNIA EDUCATION LEADERS
EXPECTED AND ENVISIONED AND
WORKED HARD TO PRODUCE. IS THERE
MORE THE STATE CAN DO AND SHOULD
DO TO ADVANCE OUR VALUES FURTHER
INSIDE THE FORMULA THAT OCCUPIES
ROUGHLY 80% OF THE STATE'S
EDUCATION FUNDING? THE ASSEMBLY
REALIZES THAT LCFF MEANS MANY
THINGS TO MANY CONSTITUENCIES
THAT CANNOT ALL BE UNPACKED IN
JUST ONE HEARING ALONE. BUT
TODAY WE WILL FOCUS ON THE
FUNDING FORMULA ITSELF, IN
ISOLATION OF THE OTHER PIECES
THAT ARE AS IMPORTANT IN LCFF,
SUCH AS THE LOCAL CONTROL
ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN FUNDS
OUTSIDE OF LCFF, WHICH ARE ALSO
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT FOR OUR
SCHOOLS AND FOR OUR STUDENTS,
AND OUR ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS
OF OUR FUNDING. WE KNOW THAT OUR
PANELISTS WILL SPEAK TO THE
INTERACTIONS, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN
WARNED AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT
THIS AT LENGTH. WE PLAN TO FOCUS
DEEPLY ON ONLY THE FORMULA.
TODAY. REOPENING THE LCFF FOR
OVERSIGHT NOW IS A CRITICAL
POINT. WE HAVE INCREASED
EDUCATION FUNDING BY 65%,
ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION OVER THE
LAST TEN YEARS ALONE, AND
STUDENT ENROLLMENT, DESPITE THE
CREATION OF NEW GRADE OF
TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN,
CONTINUES TO DECLINE. MORE
FUNDING, LESS STUDENTS IN THE
SUPERMAJORITY OF OUR SCHOOL
DISTRICTS THROUGHOUT OUR STATE.
WE KNOW WE ARE ALL WE'RE NOWHERE
NEAR ADEQUACY. SOMETHING I KNOW
MANY OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH OR
COMPLETE EQUITY TO MAKE SURE
WE'RE SERVING ALL OF OUR
STUDENTS IN THE WAY THAT THEY
NEED TO BE SERVED. HOWEVER, WE
MUST CONTINUE TO FACILITATE OUR
FISCAL STRUCTURES TOWARD THIS
GOAL WITH THE REVENUES THAT WE
DO HAVE. IN PREPARING FOR THIS
HEARING, I WAS STRUCK BY THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE ORIGINAL LCFF
TARGETS ALONE AND WHAT COULD NEW
TARGETS LOOK LIKE TO WHAT
PURPOSE? INSIDE OUR STUDENT
WEIGHTED FORMULA FOR THE FUTURE,
WE WILL BE HAVING PUBLIC COMMENT
TAKEN AT THE END OF THE PANELS
AND DISCUSSIONS FROM MEMBERS AND
THE COMMITTEE, AND NOW I'D LIKE
TO TURN IT OVER TO CO-CHAIR,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER MURATSUCHI CHAIR
OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR
ALVAREZ. AND GOOD MORNING,
EVERYONE. IT'S HARD FOR ME TO
BELIEVE THAT IN MY FRESHMAN YEAR
IN THE LEGISLATURE, WE ADOPTED
PERHAPS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
EDUCATION POLICY, CERTAINLY THE
MOST SIGNIFICANT EDUCATION
FINANCE POLICY CHANGE EVER SINCE
PROPOSITION 13. AND. AND HOW
WE'VE HAD AT LEAST TEN YEARS OF
REFLECTING ON WHAT PROGRESS
WE'VE MADE, AS WELL AS WHAT
IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY. AND
SO I REALLY WELCOME TODAY'S
HEARING. I LOOK FORWARD TO
HEARING FROM ALL THE SPEAKERS. I
WANT TO THANK MISS GABEL AND
MISS REIS FOR PULLING TOGETHER
SUCH A GREAT LINEUP OF SPEAKERS.
I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW,
FOCUS ON WHAT I'LL BE LOOKING
FOR IN TERMS OF TODAY'S HEARING.
REFLECTING ON MY TEN YEARS HERE
IN THE LEGISLATURE. YOU KNOW,
FIRST AT, YOU KNOW, WHILE WE ALL
CELEBRATED THE ADOPTION OF THE
LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA AS
PERHAPS THE MOST PROGRESSIVE
EDUCATION FUNDING POLICY IN THE
ENTIRE COUNTRY, WITH MORE
FUNDING AND RESOURCES GOING TO
DISTRICTS WITH THE GREATEST
NEEDS AT THE SAME TIME, I KNOW
THAT WE'VE WE'VE BEEN HEARING A
LOT OF DISTRICTS TALKING ABOUT
WHETHER THERE IS ADEQUATE
FUNDING FOR ALL DISTRICTS TO BE
ABLE TO MEET THE BASIC COSTS OF
RUNNING A DISTRICTS THROUGHOUT
THE STATE, AND AS A
REPRESENTATIVE OF, YOU KNOW, NOT
ONLY LOS ANGELES UNIFIED, THE
STATE'S LARGEST SCHOOL DISTRICT,
WITH 85% UNDUPLICATED COUNT AND
AS WELL AS SUBURBAN SCHOOL
DISTRICTS. I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO
BE HEARING FROM TORRANCE UNIFIED
IN MY DISTRICT TODAY THAT, YOU
KNOW, I WAS CONFRONTED FROM THE
GET GO WITH, HOW DO WE STRIKE
THAT BALANCE OF ACHIEVING EQUITY
THROUGH THE LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA, WHILE AT THE
SAME TIME ADDRESSING CONCERNS OF
ADEQUACY FOR ALL SCHOOL
DISTRICTS TO BE ABLE TO EDUCATE
ALL CALIFORNIA KIDS. AND SO I'M
HOPING THAT WE WILL CONTINUE TO
FOCUS ON THAT QUESTION OF HOW DO
WE ACHIEVE BOTH EQUITY AND
ADEQUACY IN TODAY'S HEARING,
CELEBRATING THE PROGRESS THAT
WE'VE MADE, IDENTIFY WHAT AREAS
WE NEED IMPROVEMENT ON TO
CONTINUE TO CLOSE ACHIEVEMENT
GAPS THAT WE KNOW WE, YOU KNOW,
FACED SETBACKS, SIGNIFICANT
SETBACKS DURING THE PANDEMIC.
BUT HOW DO WE CONTINUE TO MAKE
PROGRESS, NOT ONLY WITH THE
CONTINUATION OF THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA, BUT HOW
DO WE IMPROVE UPON THE LCFF
MOVING FORWARD, FOCUSING ON
WHAT'S WORKING AND WHAT NEEDS
IMPROVEMENT? SO WITH THAT, MR.
CHAIR, THANK YOU, AND I LOOK
FORWARD TO TODAY'S HEARING.
THANK YOU. I ALSO JUST WANT TO
REITERATE, WE'RE NOT HERE JUST
TO TALK ABOUT WHAT CÁC LCFF IS
OR WHAT IT'S DONE. THIS IS
REALLY A VERY INTENTIONAL
HEARING TO LISTEN FROM ALL OF
YOU WHO ARE PRACTITIONERS, WHO
ARE RESEARCHERS AS TO HOW IT'S
WORKING WELL, AS OUR CO-CHAIR
JUST MENTIONED, WHAT ARE THE
THINGS THAT PERHAPS WE COULD DO
A LITTLE BIT BETTER? WE IT WAS A
MASSIVE UNDERTAKING THE LAST
TIME TO GET TO WHERE WE ARE. AND
I THINK OVERALL WE'RE IN A MUCH
BETTER PLACE. HOWEVER, YOU KNOW,
I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD AGREE
THAT THERE'S ALWAYS IMPROVEMENTS
TO BE MADE AND THAT'S WHAT THE
CONVERSATION AND THE GOAL, IF
YOU WANT TO THE THEME OF THE
DAY, THE THEME OF THE NEXT THREE
HOURS, THE GOAL, WE'RE NOT JUST
HERE JUST TO SIT AND TALK. WE
WANT TO HEAR SPECIFICS IN TERMS
OF WHAT'S WORKING WELL AND WHAT
CAN BE IMPROVED. AND WE
APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU WHO'VE
PREPARED SO DILIGENTLY,
INCLUDING OUR STAFF, WHO DID SO
MUCH WORK TO PREPARE FOR TODAY
AND LOOKING REALLY FORWARD TO
STARTING WITH OUR FIRST PANEL
WHO ARE READY TO GO. AND WE WANT
TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING
PREPARED. THIS IS THIS ISSUE OF
THIS PANEL IS ON THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA. THE
FISCAL DESIGN AND THE OUTCOME
GOALS, THE ISSUE WILL BE A PANEL
WITH CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FINANCE
LEADERS REGARDING THE FISCAL
DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF LCFF AND
THE INTENDED STUDENT AND SYSTEM
OUTCOMES FOR THOSE PRINCIPLES. I
WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU FOR
SHARING YOUR PERSPECTIVE TODAY
ON WHERE LCFF IS TAKING
CALIFORNIA. THE COMMITTEE HAS
SPECIFICALLY ASKED THIS PANEL TO
ADDRESS A FEW QUESTIONS. ARE THE
LCFF FISCAL DESIGN CORE
PRINCIPLES STILL DRIVING STATE
EDUCATION PRIORITIES SUCH AS
ADEQUACY ADDRESSING A UNIVERSAL
BASIC NEED FOR ALL LEAS TO
INVEST IN STUDENT OUTCOMES?
SECOND, ON EQUITY IMPACT IMPACT
OUTCOMES FOR ALL UNDUPLICATED
STUDENT GROUPS. ARE THEY
EQUITABLE AND THIRD, IMPACT
OUTCOMES IN LOW PERFORMING AND
HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED
STUDENT SUBGROUPS? ARE THEY
EQUITABLE? SO WITH THAT, I WANT
TO TURN IT OVER TO OUR FIRST
PANELIST, DOCTOR JOHNSON FROM
THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,
BERKELEY, WHO WILL BE OUR FIRST
PANELIST. TO MAKE SURE YOU TURN
ON YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M
DELIGHTED TO BE HERE AND HONORED
TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SHARE. COULD YOU JUST OKAY, I
CAN'T SEE THE SLIDES. OKAY. IF
YOU JUST PROCEED, THEY'LL
THEY'LL BE UP ON THE SCREEN. AND
WE ALSO HAVE COPIES IN FRONT OF
US. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. OKAY. DO
YOU NEED A COPY OF IT. CAN YOU
COPY. YEAH. I JUST I HAVE TO BE
ABLE TO SEE. OH THERE IT IS.
OKAY. THANK YOU I APPRECIATE
THAT OKAY. GREAT. SO I WANT TO
JUST JUMP RIGHT INTO. TRYING TO.
OKAY. GOOD. I WANT TO JUST JUMP
RIGHT INTO THE JOURNEY IN 2011.
OBVIOUSLY CALIFORNIA IS THE
LARGEST AND MOST DIVERSE STATE
PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM. IN
2011, THE JOURNEY CALIFORNIA
RANKED LAST NATIONWIDE IN
AVERAGE PER PUPIL SPENDING,
ADJUSTED FOR DIFFERENCES IN COST
OF LIVING, CONSISTENTLY RANKED
IN THE BOTTOM 15 AMONG STATE
SYSTEMS IN THE TEN YEARS LEADING
UP TO LCFF IN BOTH PER PUPIL
SPENDING AND CAPACITY TO SPEND
ON EDUCATION, AND IN THE YEAR
IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING LCFF
PASSAGE, DATA FROM NAEP REVEALED
CALIFORNIA HAD AMONG THE LARGEST
SOCIOECONOMIC ACHIEVEMENT GAPS
IN THE NATION. NOW, LCFF
RESULTED IN SUBSTANTIAL
INCREASES IN PUBLIC EDUCATION
INVESTMENTS TO K THROUGH 12 AND
TRANSFORMATIVE FUNDING FORMULA
OVERHAUL THAT HAS BEEN SUSTAINED
IN RECENT YEARS, AS REFLECTED IN
THE FACT THAT THE FUNDING K-12
PUBLIC SCHOOLS RECEIVED IN 20
2023 STATE BUDGET IS NEARLY
TRIPLE THE FUNDING RECEIVED IN
2011. NOW, I WANT TO JUST
OUTLINE. THE WAY IN WHICH THE
PIECES WERE ROLLED OUT. FIRST,
IT WAS TARGETED DISTRICT
PROPERTY WEALTH, NOT IN STUDENT
NEED DEFINED BY PERCENT STUDENT
DISADVANTAGE. AND WHAT I REALLY
WANT TO LAY OUT IS THE THREE
DIMENSIONS THAT LCFF FUNDING
FORMULA WAS CHARACTERIZED BY THE
THREE COMPONENTS. THE BASE
GRANT, WHICH VARIES BY THE GRADE
SPAN OF THE STUDENTS, WHICH IS
ROUGHLY 8000, RIGHT. THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT, WHICH IS
EQUAL TO 20% OF THE ADJUSTED
BASE GRANT FOR EACH HIGH NEED
STUDENT. AND THE CONCENTRATION
GRANT, WHICH IS EQUAL TO 50% OF
THE ADJUSTED BASE GRANT PER HIGH
NEED. STUDENT DISTRICTS MORE
THAN 55%. HIGH NEED. AND WHAT I
WANT TO KIND OF EMPHASIZE HERE
IS THIS ROLL OUT OF THE $18
BILLION THAT RECEIVED FULLY
FUNDED BY THE 20 1819 SCHOOL
YEAR, ENABLED BOTH GREATER
DISCRETION IN HOW TO USE THE
RESOURCES. SORRY, I'M TRYING TO
GO BACK. THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF
A DELAY, BUT WHAT I JUST WANT
YOU TO SEE IS THE GRADUAL
ROLLOUT IN THE FUNDING. AND
OKAY. AND YOU CAN CERTAINLY SEE
THAT THAT GRADUAL ROLLOUT WHEN
YOU LOOK AT THE PRE LCFF VERSUS
THE POST LCFF DIFFERENCES IN
FUNDING, THERE'S A HUGE INCREASE
IN EACH YEAR IN THE OVERALL
FUNDING. BUT WE ALSO SEE THAT
BETWEEN THE 0 TO 55%, THERE IS
ACTUALLY A LOSS OF THE
PROGRESSIVITY IN THE FUNDING
FORMULA BETWEEN 0 AND 55%. AND
THE CONCENTRATION GRANT KICKS IN
AGAIN, THE PRE LCFF ECONOMIC
IMPACT AID, WHICH WAS REPLACED
BY LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT, MEANT THAT
SOME OF THESE MIDDLE DISTRICTS
BETWEEN 0 AND 55%, ARE LOSING
SOME OF THE PROGRESSIVITY IN THE
FUNDING FORMULA, EVEN THOUGH
THEY HAVE GREATER NEED. AND WHAT
WE DO IS LINK THE FULL UNIVERSE
OF PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENTS TO ALL
OF THE KIND OF STUDENTS TRACED
BEFORE LCFF AND THROUGHOUT THEIR
SCHOOL AGE YEARS, AND LINK IT TO
THE SCHOOLS AND FUNDING LEVELS
THAT THEY EXPERIENCED. AND WHAT
WE'RE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE IS NOT
ONLY FOLLOWING THE MONEY FORWARD
TO HOW THE MONEY WAS SPENT IN
TERMS OF CLASS SIZE, TEACHER
SALARY, TEACHER TURNOVER,
GUIDANCE COUNSELORS, WHETHER IT
WAS SPENT ON HEALTH SERVICES,
BUT HOW THAT WAS CONNECTED TO
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. AND OVER A
LONG TIME HORIZON. AND WHAT WE
WHAT WE GENERALLY DEMONSTRATE IS
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE 20 1819
COHORTS OF YEARS VERSUS THE 20
1415 THAT PREDATED LCFF, WE SEE
IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS THE BOARD
THAT YOU SEE IMPROVEMENTS FOR,
SAY, A FIFTH GRADER WHO WAS IN
20 1819 FIFTH GRADER VERSUS THE
2014 FIFTH GRADER FROM THE SAME
SCHOOL. AND WE SEE THAT
IMPROVEMENT FOR ALL DISTRICTS,
BUT PARTICULARLY AMONG THOSE
DISTRICTS THAT GOT ACCESS TO THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT. AND WE SEE
IMPROVEMENTS, PARTICULARLY IN
THE EARLY ASPECTS OF THE OF THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT. BUT THAT
FADES OUT AS THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT LOSES SOME OF ITS
PROGRESSIVITY. BUT WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT THIS IMPROVEMENT ECHOING
NOT JUST IN MATH ACHIEVEMENT,
BUT IN READING ACHIEVEMENT. AND
NOT JUST IN THE EARLY GRADES,
BUT WE FIND IT THROUGHOUT THE
SCHOOL AGE YEARS IN FACT, WE
FIND THAT ABOUT $1,000 PER PUPIL
SPENDING EXPERIENCE FOR THREE
CONSECUTIVE YEARS LEADS TO A
FULL GRADE LEVEL IMPROVEMENT IN
MATH ACHIEVEMENT RELATIVE TO
COHORTS BEFORE LCFF AND A FULL
GRADE LEVEL IMPROVEMENT IN
READING. NOW, WHAT WE REALLY
WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS THESE ARE
SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS THAT WE SEE
FOR EVERY GRADE AND SUBJECT. BUT
ALSO THAT TRANSLATED TO
SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS IN HIGH
SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES AND WHAT
WE REALLY WANT TO THEN HIGHLIGHT
IS HOW WAS THE MONEY USED, THAT
HOW MONEY IS SPENT MATTERS. BUT
THE FUNDING MUST BE ADEQUATE,
EQUITABLE AND STABLE FROM YEAR
TO YEAR SO THAT DISTRICTS CAN BE
STRATEGIC IN THEIR SPENDING AND
NOT HAVE TO CUT ONE SCHOOL
RESOURCE TO TARGET FUNDING FOR
ANOTHER. SO WE BREAK OUT THE
SCHOOL SPENDING EFFECTS
SEPARATELY FOR ALL 10,000 OF THE
SCHOOLS AND 1000 OF THE
DISTRICTS. AND WE'RE ABLE TO
DEMONSTRATE THAT THIS HISTOGRAM
IS SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF
SCHOOL SPENDING EFFECTS FOR
$1,000, INCREASE IN PER PUPIL
SPENDING. AND WE SEE THAT THE
HISTOGRAM IS CENTERED ON THAT
ONE YEAR FULL GRADE LEVEL
IMPROVEMENT. AND WHILE THERE'S
DIFFERENCES THE WHOLE HISTOGRAM
IS TO THE RIGHT OF ZERO ZERO
WOULD BE NO EFFECT. RIGHT. SO
WE'RE SEEING IMPROVEMENT ACROSS
THE BOARD EVEN THOUGH WE'RE ALSO
SEEING SOME DISTRICTS SPENDING
THE MONEY IN WAYS THAT ARE
BOOSTING ACHIEVEMENT MORE. AND
SO WHAT I JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT
IS WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FACTORS
THAT ARE DRIVING THE BIGGEST
INCREASES IN STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT, WE SEE INSTRUCTION
CENTERED SPENDING THAT REDUCES
CLASS SIZE, INCREASES TEACHER
SALARIES, REDUCES TEACHER
TURNOVER, THAT THOSE THREE
INSTRUCTIONAL CENTERS
INVESTMENTS LED TO THE MOST
IMPROVEMENTS IN STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IN
ALLOCATION TOWARD GUIDANCE,
COUNSELING, AND HEALTH SERVICES
MADE A DIFFERENCE, AS WELL AS
TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT.
AND THE KEY PIECES OF THIS ARE
THAT DISTRICTS WERE ABLE TO USE
THE L CAPS TO TAILOR TO THEIR
LOCAL NEED. NOW WE'RE HERE TO
BOTH CELEBRATE ALL OF THOSE
IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH THE 20 1819
SCHOOL YEAR, RIGHT BEFORE THE
PANDEMIC AND WHAT I JUST WANT TO
ESTABLISH IS THE FOUNDATION OF
THE HOUSE THAT LCFF HELPED
REBUILD IS SOLID, BUT WE WANT TO
EMPHASIZE THE REMODELING OF THE
HOUSE IN WAYS TO IMPROVE THE
LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA
GOING INTO THE NEXT TEN YEARS,
AND KEY ASPECTS THAT OUR PANEL
WANTS TO AMPLIFY IS FIRST
INCORPORATING A COST BASED
FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS THAT WOULD
ACCOUNT FOR THE DIFFERENCES IN
THE COMPETITIVE TEACHER SALARIES
THAT ARE NEEDED IN LOCAL LABOR
MARKETS. THERE ARE FOUR STATES
THAT HAVE FUNDING FORMULA THAT
ACCOUNT FOR THE REGIONAL COST OF
DIFFERENCES IN LIVING THAT
INCLUDE WASHINGTON, NEW YORK,
FLORIDA, TEXAS. WE ALSO JUST
WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT CURRENTLY
LACKS PROGRESSIVITY IN THE
FORMULA FOR DISTRICTS 0 TO 55%,
AS THEY HAVE INCREASED NEED
GOING FROM THE LOWER PART OF
DISADVANTAGE TOWARD THE UPPER
PARTS, TOWARD 50%. AND SO WE
WANT TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THAT
PROGRESSIVITY THAT WAS TAKEN
AWAY WITH THE ECONOMIC IMPACT
AID. WE WANT TO RETHINK ADEQUACY
IN LIGHT OF THE UNIVERSAL TK. IN
LIGHT OF THE LEARNING LOSS DUE
TO THE PANDEMIC AND IN LIGHT OF
THE GROWTH IN CHILD POVERTY AND
HOMELESSNESS THAT WE'VE
WITNESSED. AND FINALLY, WE WANT
TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE L. CAPS
ARE ONLY SERVICEABLE INSOFAR AS
THEY CAN BE DIGITIZED TO PROMOTE
AND FACILITATE INTER-DISTRICT
LEARNING. I'M ON MY LAST SLIDE,
AND I KNOW THAT I NEED TO BE OUT
OF TIME. SO IF WE COULD JUST GO
TO THIS LAST SLIDE. WELL, THE
LAST SLIDE WAS TRYING TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT THERE'S A BALANCE
BETWEEN THE INTER DISTRICT
AUTONOMY AND THE ACCOUNTABILITY
THAT WE DO HAVE. INTRA DISTRICT
RESOURCE ALLOCATION WHERE SOME
OF THE NEEDS OF DISADVANTAGED
STUDENTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT ARE
BEING NOT ADDRESSED. AND THE
QUESTION IS GREAT AUTONOMY
WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY,
SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO STRIKE WHAT
THE PROPER BALANCE AND WE WANT
TO RETHINK THOSE THINGS. I HAVE
A GREAT SET OF WISDOM
SURROUNDING ME, SO LET ME STOP
HERE AND ALLOW THE OTHER
PANELISTS TO INFORM THE REST OF
THE CONVERSATION. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, DOCTOR
JOHNSON. THAT WAS REALLY WELL
DONE IN THE TIME ALLOTTED. IT'S
SET US UP FOR SUCCESS ALREADY
FROM THE GET GO HERE, SO HOPE WE
CAN CONTINUE ON THAT. WE HAVE A
PACKED AGENDA AND WE WANT TO
MOVE ON TO DOCTOR MIKE KERST,
WHO IS ON THROUGH THE WEBEX
SYSTEM. DOCTOR CURSE, YOU ARE UP
NEXT AND PLEASE BEGIN AND YOUR
PRESENTATION WILL ALSO BE POSTED
AS SOON AS YOU BEGIN. THANK YOU.
I DON'T HAVE A SLIDES AND I
APPRECIATE APPEARING BEFORE YOU
TODAY. I WISH I COULD BE THERE
IN PERSON. MY FOCUS TODAY WITH
ALL THE OTHER WITNESSES YOU HAVE
IS TO PROVIDE THE HISTORICAL
CONTEXT AND EVOLUTION OF LCFF
LCFF. I'VE BEEN WORKING ON
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL FINANCE REFORM
SINCE 1969, AND IT TOOK A LONG
TIME TO GET WHERE WE WERE. THE
ORIGINAL BASIS OF THE LCFF CAME
OUT OF A 2008 PAPER, AND
OBVIOUSLY THAT NEEDS UPDATING
FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT. AT
THAT TIME, WE WERE WRITING THE
PAPER FOR GOVERNOR
SCHWARZENEGGER AND THE
LEGISLATURE, WHO WERE
CONSIDERING SCHOOL FINANCE
REFORM, AND WE SAW SIGNS OF THE
RECESSION COMING IN 2009 AND
TEN. AND SO WE DECIDED NOT TO
ADDRESS ADEQUACY AS IT HAS BEEN
ADDRESSED IN LAWSUITS AND OTHER
EXPERT CONCEPTS, BUT JUST TO SAY
THE STATE IS AT ALL, IT WILL
FOREVER BE DISTRIBUTING LARGE
AMOUNTS OF MONEY TO LOCAL SCHOOL
DISTRICTS AND THEREFORE THEY CAN
DO IT MUCH BETTER THAN WHAT WAS
GOING ON IN 2008, WHERE IT WAS A
HODGEPODGE OF CATEGORICAL
PROGRAMS WITH NO EQUITY. SO OUR
APPROACH WAS THEN TO FOCUS ON
EQUITY ADEQUACY. WE HAD DECIDED
TO DO BY SETTING TARGETS THAT
WOULD INCREASE GRADUALLY OVER
TIME. AND YOU SEE THAT WE'VE MET
THOSE TARGETS. AND I WOULD URGE
THE COMMITTEE TO CONSIDER
CLOSELY THE CONFUSING AND
SOMEWHAT CONTRADICTORY RESEARCH
ON WHAT ADEQUACY MEANS. IT IS.
IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM, IN MY VIEW,
WHETHER IT IT INCLUDES INPUTS OF
TEACHERS SALARIES AND SO ON OR
OUTCOMES. AND THERE'S NO
CONSENSUS TO ME AS TO WHAT THE
WORD MEANS AS IT'S BEEN BATTLED
OUT IN LAWSUITS, EQUITY AS WELL,
OF COURSE, HAS DIFFERENT
INTERPRETATIONS. SO WE USED BEST
ESTIMATES AT THE TIME FOR
SETTING SOMETHING. THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT OF AT 55%.
AND WE LOOKED AT RESEARCH ON THE
IMPACT OF CONCENTRATED POVERTY
AND OTHER ISSUES THAT DRAG DOWN
SCHOOL ATTAINMENT OF CALIFORNIA,
AS FAR AS I KNOW, IS DISTINCTIVE
IN USING THE IDEA OF
CONCENTRATION THAT AT SOME POINT
THE COMMUNITY THAT THE PUPIL IS
LIVING IN IS SO OVERWHELMINGLY
IMPACTED THAT YOU NEED MORE
MONEY. AND I THINK THAT'S AN
IMPORTANT CONCEPT TO INCLUDE AT
THE TIME, WE DECIDED NOT TO
INCLUDE SPECIAL EDUCATION, WE
DIDN'T HAVE A CLEAR IDEA AS TO
HOW TO SOLVE IT, AND NOW IT IS
THE LAST CATEGORICAL OUT THERE.
SEPARATE SYSTEM. WE WANT TO
INTEGRATE THE SPECIAL EDUCATION
PUPILS INTO THE REGULAR
CLASSROOM, BUT YET WE HAVE A
CATEGORICAL FUNDING SYSTEM THAT
SEPARATES THEM OUT. THERE ARE
THREE STUDIES BY WESTED ON
FINANCE, GOVERNANCE AND
ACCOUNTABILITY THAT I THINK GIVE
US SOME WAYS TO THINK ABOUT
THIS, THAT WE DID NOT HAVE WHEN
WE FORMULATED OUR ORIGINAL
IDEAS. SO I WOULD URGE ATTENTION
TO THAT AS WELL. RUCKER
MENTIONED THE REGIONAL COST OF
LIVING ADJUSTMENTS THAT WAS IN
OUR ORIGINAL PAPER IN 2008, AND
IT'S THE ONLY MAJOR CONCEPT FROM
THAT PAPER THAT WE DIDN'T GET IN
THE LCFF LEGISLATION. AND THE
OBVIOUSLY, THE DIFFERENCES IN
HOUSING COSTS, FOR EXAMPLE,
BETWEEN WHERE I LIVE ON SANTA
CLARA, THE BORDER OF SANTA CLARA
AND SAN MATEO COUNTY ARE QUITE
DIFFERENT COMPARED TO OTHER
PARTS OF THE STATE. I WOULD ALSO
RECOMMEND IN ADDITION TO THE
OTHER STATES THAT HAVE IT, A
STUDY I SENT YOUR STAFF FROM
COLORADO, WHICH IS MORE RECENT
AND HAS DENVER AND HAS
ADJUSTMENTS IN IT, AND I THINK
THEY USED SOME TECHNOLOGY THAT
IS DIFFERENT THAN THE OTHER
PLACES AND WORTH YOUR
CONSIDERATION. NOW. ALSO, AT THE
TIME WE USED A FREE LUNCH, WHICH
WAS THE MAJOR WAY THE POVERTY
WAS DEFINED. IT WAS NEVER A, YOU
KNOW, PRECISE WAY. SINCE THEN,
FREE LUNCH HAS EXPANDED
DRAMATICALLY. AND IT IT, I THINK,
DESERVES RECONSIDERATION. THERE
ARE OTHER STUDIES WHICH I SENT
YOUR STAFF OF USING FEDERAL
CRITERIA FOR SOME OF THEIR
SPECIAL NEEDS GRANTS, AND EVEN
HAVE THE AMAZING THING IN NEVADA
OF WHERE THEY USE 10 TO 12
FACTORS WITH I TO COME UP WITH A
MEASURE OF STUDENT POVERTY, I
THINK THAT'S A REACH TOO FAR.
BUT IT'S INTERESTING. SO THAT'S
ANOTHER AREA OF, I THINK IN FREE
LUNCH THAT YOU WANT TO TAKE A
LOOK AT. NOW WE AGONIZED OVER
HOW TO CON THE AREA OF DO YOU
DISTRIBUTE THE MONEY TO
DISTRICTS VERSUS SCHOOLS? I WAS
AN ADMINISTRATOR AT THE FEDERAL
LEVEL OF TITLE ONE OF THE
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY
EDUCATION ACT. AND THAT, OF
COURSE, ALLOCATES TO SCHOOLS.
BUT OUR VIEW WAS AND THIS WAS
PARTLY IN CONSULTATION
EVENTUALLY WITH GOVERNOR BROWN
IS TO PROCEED WITH HUMILITY. WE
DIDN'T HOW WE JUST DIDN'T THINK
WE KNEW HOW TO ALLOCATE MONEY
FROM SACRAMENTO TO OVER 10,000
SCHOOLS. AND SO OUR VIEW WAS
THAT WE WOULD GIVE IT TO THE
DISTRICTS AND ALLOW THEM TO
DISTRIBUTE THE MONEY WITHIN
THEIR OWN AREAS. AND I THINK
THAT'S STILL REALLY APPLIES,
ALTHOUGH THERE MAY BE WAYS AND
WE HAVE SOME NEW THE EQUITY
MULTIPLIER, SOME NEW WAYS TO
BRING SCHOOLS IN. BUT DOCTOR
KIRSCH, CAN I ASK YOU TO DO ONE
FINAL COMMENT? I KNOW I HAVE
QUESTIONS FOR YOU AND THE OTHER
MEMBERS. OKAY, SURE. AND THEN MY
FINAL COMMENT IS, IS THE
ACCOUNTING SYSTEM. THE
ACCOUNTING SYSTEM MAKES IT HARD
TO SORT OUT WHAT WHAT MONEY IS
SPENT IN DISTRICTS AND WHAT
MONEY IS SPENT IN SCHOOLS. AND
IT'S IN BIG BUCKETS LIKE
ADMINISTRATION AND INSTRUCTION.
AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET THE
INFORMATION WE NEED IN MANY WAYS
WITH THE CURRENT ACCOUNTING
SYSTEM. I'LL STOP THERE. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
APPRECIATE THAT. WE'LL NOW MOVE
ON TO OUR NEXT PANELIST
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, BROOKS
ALLEN. GOOD MORNING, AND THANK
YOU FOR INVITING ME TO JOIN THIS
IMPORTANT CONVERSATION. MY NAME
IS BROOKS ALLEN. I SERVE AS
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE
CALIFORNIA STATE BOARD OF
EDUCATION AND EDUCATION, POLICY
ADVISOR TO GOVERNOR NEWSOM.
NOTABLY, MY COMMENTS THIS
MORNING REGARDING THE ORIGINS OF
THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING
FORMULA ARE ALSO INFORMED BY MY
EXPERIENCES IN 2012 AND 2013,
WHEN I SERVED AS A STATEWIDE
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ADVOCACY
FOR THE ACLU OF CALIFORNIA, AND
WORKED CLOSELY WITH THE
COALITION OF STUDENT, FAMILY AND
COMMUNITY AND CIVIL RIGHTS
ORGANIZATIONS ON EFFORTS THAT
SUPPORTED, ADVOCATED FOR, AND
HELPED SHAPE THE ENACTMENT OF
THE LCFF. SUBSEQUENTLY, I HAD
THE PLEASURE OF JOINING THE
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION STAFF
IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER, AND
WORKED ON THE INITIAL SET OF
LCFF EXPENDITURE REGULATIONS AND
THE VERY FIRST LOCAL CONTROL AND
ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN TEMPLATE. AS
A MEMBER OF THAT STAFF. WITH
THAT BACKGROUND, I WOULD LIKE TO
OFFER A FEW OBSERVATIONS TO
SUPPORT YOUR DELIBERATIONS
TODAY. THE FIRST BUILDING ON MY
FELLOW PANELISTS COMMENTS IS TO
UNDERSCORE THAT THE LCFF STANDS
AS A LANDMARK ACHIEVEMENT IN
CALIFORNIA'S EFFORT TO FULFILL
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROMISE TO
PROVIDE EQUAL EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITY. WHILE WE DON'T HAVE
THE TIME TODAY IN THE SHORT TIME
TO REVIEW THE ENTIRE HISTORY, I
THINK WE ARE ALL WELL SERVED TO
REMEMBER THAT WHETHER IT WAS THE
SERRANO FINANCE LITIGATION IN
THE 1970S, THE CALIFORNIA
SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN THE
1990S TO PROTECT THE RIGHT OF
STUDENTS TO BASIC EDUCATIONAL
EQUALITY, OR THE WILLIAMS
SETTLEMENT IN THE EARLY 2000.
THE FOCUS HAS BEEN ON AT THAT
TIME WAS REALLY ON SEEKING TO
MAKE SURE THAT ALL STUDENTS WITH
GREATER NEEDS RECEIVE ROUGHLY
THE SAME AS THEIR PEERS. IT WAS
A QUESTION OF EQUALITY, NOT
EQUITY. LCFF REPRESENTED A SEA
CHANGE. IT WAS THE LARGEST STATE
IN THE UNION STANDING UP AND
DECLARING THAT EQUAL EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITY COULD ONLY BE
ACHIEVED BY PROVIDING MORE
FUNDING TO SERVE STUDENTS WITH
THE GREATEST NEEDS. AN EQUITY
BASED ALLOCATION FORMULA DOCTOR
KERSTEN AND HIS COLLEAGUES
PROPOSED, AND GOVERNOR BROWN AND
THE LEGISLATURE MADE A REALITY
THANKS TO CONTINUED CHAMPIONED
INVESTMENTS BY THE GOVERNOR AND
THE LEGISLATURE. TODAY, WE SEE
THAT NEARLY OF THE NEARLY $80
BILLION IN LCFF IS ALLOCATED TO
LEAS, OVER 14 BILLION IS NOW
PROVIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE
NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE LOW
INCOME ENGLISH LEARNERS OR
FOSTER YOUTH, INCLUDING AN
AUGMENTATION OF NEARLY 4.6
BILLION OVER THE PAST SIX YEARS
THAT DEMONSTRATES THE STATE'S
CONTINUED AND GROWING COMMITMENT
TO MEETING THE NEEDS OF STUDENTS
WITH THE GREATEST NEEDS. AS WE
CONSIDER THIS GROUNDBREAKING
EQUITY FORMULA 11 YEARS LATER,
AS YOU BOTH REFERENCED AT THE
TOP, I WOULD LIKE TO OFFER TWO
HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS
PERTINENT TO THE FRAMING OF THE
DISCUSSION. THE FIRST IS THAT
THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING
FORMULA IS JUST THAT A FORMULA,
AND NOT A STATEWIDE REVENUE
TARGET. IT WAS ENACTED, AS MANY
OF US WILL RECALL, AGAINST THE
BACKDROP OF A DEEP FISCAL CRISIS,
ONE THAT HAD LARGE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS ACROSS THE STATE
CONTEMPLATING CUTTING ENTIRE
WEEKS OFF OF THE SCHOOL YEAR
BEFORE THE VOTERS PASSED
PROPOSITION 30IN 2012. BUT WHILE
PROPOSITION 30 PROVIDED AN
ESSENTIAL INFUSION OF FUNDS FOR
SCHOOLS, LCFF ITSELF WAS
DESIGNED TO PROVIDE A
SIMPLIFIED, TRANSPARENT AND
EQUITY DRIVEN ALLOCATION OF
FUNDS. AS SCHOOL FUNDING
RECOVERED AND GREW, A PERIOD
THAT NOTABLY HAS SEEN PROP 98
FUNDING INCREASE BY 185% SINCE
THE ENACTMENT OF LCFF, IT DID
NOT PROMISE TO GENERATE
ADDITIONAL REVENUE, AND THUS I
POSIT THAT THE FORMULA SHOULD
NOT BE JUDGED BY WHETHER IT HAS
INCREASED OVERALL FUNDING TO,
QUOTE UNQUOTE, ADEQUATE LEVELS.
HOWEVER, THAT MAY BE DEFINED IN
TODAY'S DELIBERATIONS, RATHER,
IN TERMS OF CHANGING THE
FOUNDATIONAL APPROACH FOR HOW
CALIFORNIA DISTRIBUTES ALL
AVAILABLE FUNDING TO SCHOOLS
EVEN BEYOND LCFF FUNDING,
INCLUDING HOW WE'VE APPROACHED
THE DISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL
RELIEF FUNDING AND LARGE,
TRANSFORMATIVE, EQUITY DRIVEN
INVESTMENTS IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
AND EXPANDED LEARNING TIME,
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT AGAINST
THAT BAR, IT HAS BEEN
EXTRAORDINARILY SUCCESSFUL. IT
NOW REPRESENTS FUNDAMENTALLY HOW
WE IN CALIFORNIA DO BUSINESS AND
MAINTAINING AN EQUITY INFUSED
BASELINE FOR ALLOCATING FUNDS IN
PURSUIT OF EQUAL EDUCATIONAL
OPPORTUNITY IS MORE IMPORTANT
THAN EVER, GIVEN THE HIGH
PROPORTION OF HIGH NEED STUDENTS
IN OUR SCHOOLS. TWO THE LCFF
ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY IS
INEXTRICABLY INTERWOVEN WITH THE
PLANNING AND ACCOUNTABILITY
PROVISIONS, MOST SPECIFICALLY,
THE LOCAL CONTROL AND
ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN, AND THEY
SHOULD BE EVALUATED TOGETHER.
WARNING FULLY UNDERSTOOD. BUT I
JUST I NEED TO UNDERSCORE THIS
POINT. IT'S EVIDENT WHEN WE LOOK
BACK ABOUT HOW THE FORMULA WAS
DEVELOPED IN 2012. WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT THE WEIGHTED
STUDENT FORMULA. THAT WAS THE
FORMULA CONVERSATION. IT REALLY
WASN'T UNTIL THE LEGISLATURE
ADVOCATES. OTHERS PRESSED
ASSEMBLYMEMBER TO SEE THE
ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISIONS AND
OTHER PIECES GET INTO IT, AND WE
EVEN HAD THE NAME THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA IN 2013.
EVOLVE THAT WE FINALLY SAW IT
ENACTED. AND AT THAT POINT, WE
SAW THAT THE VERY EXPENDITURE
REGULATIONS THEMSELVES GOVERNING
THE ALLOCATION AND USE OF
SUPPLEMENTAL CONCENTRATION GRANT
FUNDS GOT EMBEDDED IN THE LCAP
ITSELF. THE EXPENSE REGULATIONS,
LITERALLY, ABOUT HOW WE ALLOCATE
THE FORMULA ARE EMBEDDED IN THAT
LCAP, AND THEREFORE ANY
EVALUATION OF HOW WELL THE LCFF
GOAL OF IMPROVING EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES FOR THE HIGHEST NEEDS
STUDENTS, AS COMPARED TO
SERVICES PROVIDED TO ALL
STUDENTS, IS BEING ACHIEVED.
MUST LOOK AT THE USE AND
APPROVAL OF LCAP. CAN I ASK YOU
FOR A FINAL COMMENT? I ALSO HAVE
QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SO WE'LL BE
BACK. CERTAINLY. YEAH,
ABSOLUTELY. THE FORMULA AND THE
ASSOCIATED PLANNING
ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISIONS HAVE
BEEN EVOLVING EVER SINCE
ENACTMENT. AND RECENT
INNOVATIONS BEAR CAREFUL STUDY.
FUNDAMENTALLY, TO BORROW FROM
ONE OF MY FAVORITE CHARGES THAT
PRESIDENT KIRST GAVE US AND HE
REFERRED TO IT JUST NOW, WE ALL
MUST PRACTICE PATIENCE,
PERSISTENCE, AND HUMILITY IN THE
INTEREST OF TIME. I'M NOT GOING
TO RUN THROUGH THE DETAILS OF
EACH, BUT I HOPE THAT THE
FORTHCOMING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
HOW WE CONTINUE TO BUILD ON THE
LCFF FOUNDATION WILL TOUCH ON
HOW EXPERIENCE AND STUDIES LED
TO THE CONCENTRATION GRANT ADD
ON THAT PROVIDES OVER $1 BILLION
TO STUDENT AND STAFF TO IMPROVE
TO DECREASE STUDENT AND STAFF
RATIOS AT INDIVIDUAL SCHOOLS
WITH CONCENTRATION OF HIGH NEEDS
STUDENTS, THE ALLOCATION OF
LEARNING ACCELERATION FUNDS IN
2021 THAT INCLUDED ADDITIONAL
FUNDS FOR UNHOUSED STUDENTS ON
TOP OF THE LCFF DRIVEN
ALLOCATION, AND THERE PROVIDES
AN EARLY INDICATOR OF WHAT IT
WOULD LOOK LIKE TO STUDY
DUPLICATION. AND THEN FINALLY
PROVIDING THE ADDITIONAL 300
MILLION IN ONGOING EQUITY
MULTIPLIER FUNDS AND RECENT
CHANGES TO THE LCAP TEMPLATE TO
HELP LEAS BETTER RESOURCE,
BETTER FOCUS RESOURCES ON
STUDENT GROUP AND SCHOOL LEVEL
DISPARITIES, AND STUDENT
OPPORTUNITIES AND OUTCOMES.
WE'RE ALL TOGETHER IN THIS
CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT JOURNEY
AND PURSUIT OF ENSURING THAT ALL
STUDENTS RECEIVE HIGH QUALITY
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES TO
HELP THEM SUCCEED AND THRIVE.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THE
CONTINUING CONVERSATION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT.
MOVE ON TO OUR NEXT SPEAKER WITH
CHILDREN. NOW, MR. TED LAMPERT,
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
MR. CHAIRS AND MEMBERS. AND
FIRST, I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU
AND YOUR STAFF FOR DOING THIS
OVERSIGHT HEARING. AS A FORMER
MEMBER AND SOMEONE WHO'S WORKED
WITH THE LEGISLATURE A LONG
TIME, I'VE ALWAYS FELT
LEGISLATURE DOESN'T DO ENOUGH
OVERSIGHT. SO THANK YOU FOR
DOING THIS, ESPECIALLY ON THIS
CRITICAL THIS CRITICAL MEASURE.
AND JUST TO BORROW FROM RUTGERS
METAPHOR, LCFF IS A TEN YEAR OLD
HOUSE. WE SHOULDN'T MOVE. LET'S
NOT TEAR IT DOWN. BUT SOME
REMODELING WOULD BE IN ORDER. SO
I HAVE A COUPLE SPECIFIC
SUGGESTIONS ABOUT THAT
REMODELING. BUT FIRST, JUST BIG
PICTURE. BROOKS MENTIONED THE
COALITION OF GROUPS, ACLU,
CHILDREN NOW OTHERS THAT ARE ALL
NOW REPRESENTED THROUGH THE
EQUITY COALITION. WHY DID WE SO
STRONGLY FIGHT FOR THIS LAW?
ONE, BECAUSE IT RATIONALIZED THE
FUNDING SYSTEM AND RATIONALIZED
WHAT WAS AN OVERREGULATED,
CATEGORICAL SYSTEM. TWO BECAUSE
IT WAS EQUITY BASED RISK
DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS AND ON
PAPER, IT IS THE STRONGEST
EQUITY AND FINANCE LAW IN THE
COUNTRY. AND IMPORTANTLY, IT WAS
PREDICATED ON A STRONG
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM. WHAT LCFF
NEVER WAS, WAS ABOUT GETTING
MORE MONEY FOR SCHOOLS. IN FACT,
ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS WE USED
WITH THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
ACROSS THE STATE WAS, LET'S
RATIONALIZE THE FINANCE SYSTEM,
LET'S MAKE SENSE OF THAT. THAT
WILL HELP US ADVOCATE TO THE
GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE AND OR
THE VOTERS FOR A LOT MORE MONEY
FOR EDUCATION THAT HASN'T COME
TO PASS IN THE FIRST DECADE,
MAYBE THE SECOND DECADE. AND
JUST TO WORD ON THE QUOTE
ADEQUACY BEFORE WE GET TO THE
FORMULA, WE WORK WITH OVER 5600
GROUPS THROUGH OUR CHILDREN'S
MOVEMENT GROUPS ACROSS THE STATE
PARENTS, STUDENTS, COMMUNITY,
FAITH BASED OTHERS. I THINK
ANYONE IN SCHOOLS TODAY WOULD
SAY WE'RE CLOSE TO ADEQUATE. AS
OUR 2024 REPORT CARD SHOWS, WE
RANK 49TH IN TEACHER STAFFING
RATIOS, 46 IN TOTAL STAFFING AND
WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS COMPARE
OURSELVES TO OTHER STATES. OF
COURSE, WE'VE SIGNIFICANTLY
INCREASED EDUCATION FUNDING OVER
THE LAST DECADE. SO HAVE OTHER
STATES. AND IF YOU LOOK AT HOW
WE INVEST BASED ON OUR PERSONAL
INCOME, WE ARE $23 BILLION A
YEAR BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE,
50 BILLION BELOW NEW YORK AND 80
BILLION BELOW NEW JERSEY. SO
JUST A NATIONAL CONTEXT. WHEN
FOLKS TALK ABOUT ADEQUATE
FUNDING. SO THEN SPECIFICALLY ON
THE REMODELING, WE TRULY NEED TO
ENSURE WHAT WAS ALWAYS THE
PROMISE OF LCFF AND WHY THE
EQUITY GROUPS PUSHED SO HARD FOR
IT. AND THAT IS TO ENSURE
STUDENTS GENERATING LCFF DOLLARS
RECEIVE THE HIGHER LEVEL OF
SERVICE. WHAT WE'VE SEEN TOO
OFTEN IS THAT THE DOLLARS ARE
PROGRESSIVELY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS
DISTRICTS, BUT OFTEN
REGRESSIVELY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS
SCHOOLS WITHIN THE DISTRICT. AND
MIKE MENTIONED THE DEBATE. I
REMEMBER MANY DEBATES IN
CHILDREN HOUSE CONFERENCE ROOM
WITH MIKE AND OTHERS ABOUT HOW
WE TURNED HIS RESEARCH PAPER
INTO LAW. THERE WAS A LOT OF
DEBATE ABOUT, DO YOU GIVE THE
MONEY TO DISTRICTS OR DIRECTLY
TO STUDENTS? AND AS MIKE
MENTIONED, MAYBE IT'S TIME TO
RECONSIDER THAT A LITTLE BIT.
GIVEN THE FLAWS IN THE DISTRICT
BASED MODEL. BUT WHY OVERALL
PERFORMANCE HAS INCREASED. THERE
REALLY HAS BEEN LITTLE TO NO
PROGRESS ON CLOSING ACHIEVEMENT
GAPS. AS THE REPORT CARD SHOWS,
CALIFORNIA STILL HAS THE HIGHEST
ACHIEVEMENT GAPS BY INCOME IN
THE NATION IN EIGHTH GRADE MATH
AND 48TH IN FOURTH GRADE
READING. SO WE NEED TO REALLY
THINK FOR A FUTURE HEARING. ARE
OVERHAULING AND STREAMLINING THE
LCAP PROCESS AND HAVING MUCH
MORE TRANSPARENCY AND REALLY
STRENGTHENING THAT
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM, BUT
SPECIFICALLY FOR TODAY, IT
REALLY IS TIME TO CONSIDER
INCREASING THE WEIGHTS FOR THE
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANTS AND WHAT I WOULD TERM A
REAL CHANCE TO REINVEST THE
DECLINING ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND,
DRIVEN LARGELY BY CHANGING BIRTH
RATES. OUR SCHOOLS ARE EXPECTED
TO LOSE OVER 660 000 STUDENTS
OVER THE NEXT DECADE. DISTRICTS
FACE UNIQUE CHALLENGES IN
ADDRESSING THIS DECLINING
ENROLLMENT WITH ME AND MY
COLLEAGUES AT CHILDREN NOW WOULD
PROPOSE IS A DECLINING
ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND FOR THE
GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE TO
ADOPT. GIVEN THAT PROPOSITION 98
WILL CONTINUE TO GROW WITH THE
STATE'S ECONOMY. THAT WAS
ESTIMATED 11.5 BILLION FROM
DECLINING ENROLLMENT COULD BE
REALLOCATED TO NEW SCHOOL
SPENDING. WE WOULD PROPOSE THAT
THE STATE BY FORMULA CALCULATE
THE LCFF SAVINGS FROM DECLINING
ENROLLMENT AND REINVEST THOSE
FUNDS, DIVIDING THE FUNDING
BETWEEN ONE INCREASING THE S AND
C RATES, AND TWO STRENGTHENING
STRENGTHENING THE BASE TO MOVE
US TOWARDS A MORE EQUITABLE AND
ADEQUATE FUNDING SYSTEM. AND
FINALLY, ONE THING I WOULD
CONSIDER A TEARING DOWN, NOT A
REMODEL, IS ADDING A LOT MORE
CATEGORICALS WE HAVE SEEN OVER
THE LAST DECADE AS WE'VE HAD
FEWER STUDENTS FREEING UP MORE
DOLLARS, MUCH AS WHAT HAS BEEN
INVESTED IS A NEW CATEGORICAL
PROGRAMS, I THINK IT'S VERY
IMPORTANT WE STAY WITH THE WITH
THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF LCFF ONE.
I WOULDN'T CALL IT AN EXCEPTION.
TK IS NOT A CATEGORICAL. IT'S AN
EXTRA GRADE, AND AS PART OF THIS
DISCUSSION, I THINK WE ALL KNOW
AND WE KNOW INTERNATIONALLY THAT
IN ADDITION TO THE REFORMS WE'VE
BEEN TALKING ABOUT, A STRONGLY
FUNDED EARLY CHILDHOOD SYSTEM
WILL ALSO LEAD TO GREATER
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. RIGHT ON TIME. THANK
YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. WE ARE NOW
MOVING ON TO MR. EDGAR ZAZUETA
ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS. THANK YOU FOR
BEING HERE. GOOD MORNING.
CHAIRMAN. MICROPHONE, PLEASE. HI.
THIS AGAIN. GOOD MORNING TO OUR
CHAIRMAN. MY NAME IS EDGAR
ZAZUETA. I'M THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF THE ASSOCIATION FOR
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS, REPRESENTING
MORE THAN 17,000 SCHOOL LEADERS
THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA. LIKE MY
COLLEAGUES REALLY APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE SOME
PERSPECTIVE AND SOME REFLECTION
ON THE TEN YEARS, THE TEN PLUS
YEARS OF LCFF BEFORE I SAY
ANYTHING ELSE, I THINK IT'S
WORTH NOTING, ESPECIALLY BEING A
STATEWIDE ASSOCIATION. AND I
THINK SOMETHING THAT EVERYBODY
RECOGNIZES. WE HAVE A THOUSAND
LEAS IN THIS DISTRICT WITH
DIVERSE NEEDS, DIVERSE
PERSPECTIVES. ANYTIME WE'RE
GIVING SOME PERSPECTIVE OF
TRYING TO THAT REFLECTS THE
WHOLE STATE THAT THOSE ARE
VARIED. AND I WANT TO PUT THAT
OUT THERE, THAT THE EXPERIENCE
HAS BEEN DIFFERENT WITH THAT
BEING SAID, I THINK IT SHOULD BE
SAID UNEQUIVOCALLY, AND THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT'S BACKED UP, I
THINK, BY THE RESEARCH BY OTHER
FOLKS, OUTSIDE FOLKS COMING IN
AND GETTING THE PERSPECTIVES OF
OUR MEMBERS THAT THAT LCFF AND
THIS IS THE BELIEF OF THE FIELD,
THAT THE LCFF HAS BEEN A
CATALYST, AN IMPORTANT CATALYST
FOR MEANINGFUL CHANGES TO OUR
PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM. ITS
FUNDING SYSTEM, THE FUNDING
DESIGN HAS PUT A BIGGER EMPHASIS
ON EQUITY. AND I WOULD POINT
OUT, BEYOND EVEN JUST OUR
FINANCE SYSTEM, I LOVE WHAT MR.
ALLEN HERE SAID ABOUT THAT. IT
FUNDAMENTALLY HAS CHANGED THE
WAY WE DO BUSINESS. AND I THINK
THIS THIS CONVERSATION ABOUT
FINANCES GOES BEYOND JUST THE
DISTRIBUTION OF DOLLARS OF JUST
HOW ARE WE PUTTING EQUITY AT THE
FOREFRONT? AND I DO THINK THAT
IS A BYPRODUCT OF THIS
CONVERSATION WITH THE LCFF LIKE
DOCTOR JOHNSON AND MANY OTHER
STUDIES HAVE HAVE POINTED OUT
THAT THERE'S CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT
MONEY HAS MATTERED, THAT IT HAS
TRANSLATED INTO ACHIEVEMENT GAPS
AND CLOSING, BEGINNING TO CLOSE.
THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP BETWEEN HIGH
NEED STUDENTS AND THEIR PEERS
THAT TARGETED FUNDING HAS
ALLOWED DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL ACADEMIC SUPPORT AND
TUTORING AND OTHER RESOURCES
THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE
NEEDS OF LOW INCOME STUDENTS,
ENGLISH LEARNERS, AND FOSTER
YOUTH. THE OTHER TENANT, AS
DOCTOR KURZ POINTED OUT, AND ONE
THAT I THINK WHEN WE GET THE
PERSPECTIVE OF OUR FOLKS IN THE
FIELD, IS THIS EMPHASIS ON LOCAL
CONTROL AND WHAT THAT HAS
ACTUALLY MEANT FOR JUST HOW WE
DO BUSINESS. IF YOU WILL, IN A
STATE THAT IS AS DIVERSE AS
OURS, THE RECOGNITION THAT ONE
SIZE DOESN'T FIT ALL, I THINK
WAS A VERY CRITICAL ONE. THE
FLEXIBILITY THAT LCFF HAS HAS
GIVEN THE FIELD HAS EMPOWERED
SCHOOL LEADERS, TEACHERS,
CLASSIFIED EMPLOYEES, PARENTS
AND COMMUNITY TO WORK
COLLABORATIVELY TO IDENTIFY AND
ADDRESS THE HIGHEST NEEDS FOR
THEIR SPECIFIC COMMUNITY. I
THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, ONE
OF THE BIGGEST TAKEAWAYS FROM
LCFF IS THAT THE MOVE TO PUT
MORE DECISION MAKING AUTHORITY
ON THE HANDS OF THOSE CLOSEST TO
THE STUDENTS AGAIN, HAS BEEN A
VERY CRITICAL ONE, AND AN
IMPORTANT ONE. WHEN WE DO NOW.
TURNING THE PAGE WHEN WE ASK FOR
PERSPECTIVES FROM FROM OUR
DIVERSE SET OF LEADERS ABOUT THE
REFLECTION OF LCFF HAS MEANT FOR
THEIR RESPECTIVE SCHOOLS AND
COMMUNITIES. I THINK ONE THEME
ALWAYS COMES TO THE TOP OF THE
LIST, AND IT'S LOOKING AT THE
ADEQUACY OF THE BASE GRANT THAT
THE FORMULA WAS WAS FOUNDED
UPON. WHILE LCFF HAS PROVIDED
MEANINGFUL CHANGE, SCHOOL
LEADERS WILL TELL YOU THAT THERE
IS REAL NEED TO CONSIDER THE
ADEQUACY OF BASE GRANT IN THE
FORMULA. AGAIN, MANY STUDIES
THAT LA HAS REPORTED ON
ADDRESSING THE BASE GRANT IS
NECESSARY TO MAKE SURE THAT
DISTRICTS ARE BEING ABLE TO
MAINTAIN THEIR ESSENTIAL
SERVICES. SCHOOL SERVICES OF
CALIFORNIA, AMONGST OTHER
EDUCATIONAL EXPERTS, HAVE
REPEATEDLY HIGHLIGHTED HOW THE
BASE GRANTS ARE NOT KEEPING UP
WITH THE RISING COSTS THAT ARE
NECESSARY TO SERVE OUR STUDENTS
IN THIS STATE. FISCAL FORECASTS
THAT THEY'VE DONE HAVE SHOWN
THAT PROJECTED THE PROJECTED
INCREASES IN THE COLA THAT WE'RE
GOING TO SEE HERE IN THE NEXT
COUPLE OF YEARS ARE NOT GOING TO
KEEP UP WITH THE PACE OF JUST
BASIC NEEDS FOR YOUR SCHOOL
DISTRICT. ONE EXAMPLE, AND THIS
WAS DONE IN ONE OF THOSE
PROJECTIONS THAT IF YOU LOOK AT
YOUR AVERAGE DISTRICT AND JUST
THE COST TO FUND JUST REGULAR
STEP AND COLUMN INCREASES
COUPLED WITH INFLATION, THE
GROWTH THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE
IN LCFF IN THE BASE GRANT OVER
THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS IS NOT
GOING TO KEEP TRACK WITH THAT.
AND THAT'S NOT EVEN COUNTING ANY.
THAT'S BEFORE YOU TAKE INTO
ACCOUNT ANY COMPENSATION
INCREASES FOR OR ANY OTHER COSTS
FOR OUR EMPLOYEES. AGAIN,
ADDRESSING THE ADEQUACY OF THE
BASE GRANT WILL NOT ONLY DEAL
WITH SOME OF THOSE BASIC COSTS,
I THINK IT SHOULD BE POINTED
OUT, IT ALSO ADVANCES EQUITY
BECAUSE WHILE YOU ADDRESS THE
ADEQUACY OF THE BASE GRANT, YOU
ALSO ARE LEVELING UP
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANTS AS A RESULT OF THAT.
MOVING ON, I THINK ANOTHER THEME
THAT THAT IS CONNECTED TO THE
ADEQUACY OF THE SPACE GRANT IS
THE FIXED COST THAT DISTRICTS
ARE FACING. WHILE I THINK
ACKNOWLEDGING THE POINTS THAT
HAVE BEEN WELL MADE THAT THIS IS
A DISTRIBUTIONAL FORMULA, IT IS
THE MAIN DISTRIBUTIONAL FORMULA
IN THE WAY THAT WE GET MONEY NOW
TO SCHOOLS. SO FOR THAT REASON,
I KNOW WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE
STATE EVERY YEAR PUTS OUT WHAT
YOUR COMPOSITE PER ADA NUMBER IS
PER STUDENT. I THINK OUR FOLKS
WILL WILL BE QUICK TO POINT OUT
THAT THAT DOESN'T ALWAYS TELL
THE WHOLE STORY AND THE
DIVERSITY OF OUR DISTRICTS AND
THE MONEY THAT THEY'RE GETTING
THAT THAT ESPECIALLY IN AN
ENVIRONMENT WITH DECLINING
ENROLLMENT AND NUMEROUS OTHER
COSTS, THAT IS A CHALLENGE. FOR
EXAMPLE, SCHOOL EMPLOYER PENSION
CONTRIBUTION COSTS HAVE MORE
THAN DOUBLED SINCE THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF LCFF. SCHOOLS
HAVE RECEIVED DOUBLE DIGIT
INCREASES IN HEALTH CARE COSTS.
INSURANCE RATES HAVE BEEN
ASTRONOMICAL OVER THE LAST 5 TO
10 YEARS. FIRE FLOODS,
CYBERSECURITY, OLD CHILD ABUSE
CASES THAT HAVE COME TO THE
FOREFRONT HAVE ALL PUT OUR
SCHOOL'S FINANCES AT AT RISK AND
HAD DRIBBLING HAVE CONSISTENTLY
DRIVEN UP ANNUAL COSTS. AGAIN,
MULTIPLE STUDIES, INCLUDING
COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS BY THE
PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF
CALIFORNIA THAT THE LCFF BASE
GRANT HAS NOT SUFFICIENTLY
COVERED ALL THESE ALL THESE
ISSUES KIND OF MOVING INTO
CONCLUSION HERE, IS THAT ONE OF
THE THEMES AND DOCTOR KIRSTEN'S
POINTED THIS OUT, THAT ONE OF IN
THE EFFORT TO FUNDAMENTALLY
THINK ABOUT OUR SCHOOL FINANCE
SYSTEM, THE ONE OUTLIER WAS THE
INTERACTION WITH OUR SPECIAL
EDUCATION FUNDING, A CONSISTENT
THEME HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP BOTH
FROM OUR MEMBERS, FROM
PERSPECTIVES, FROM POLICYMAKERS
ABOUT THINKING ABOUT WHAT IS
THAT INTERACTION. I LOVE THE
ANALOGY ABOUT THE REMODELING,
AND I THINK WE ALWAYS WOULD
CAUTION ABOUT WIDE SCALE
CHANGES, BUT I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THIS INTERACTION OF HOW WE BEST
FUND OUR STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES AND WHAT ARE THE
INTERACTIONS WITH THE FORMULA,
ARE ONE THAT DO WARRANT
CONTINUED CONSIDERATION WHILE
ALSO ACKNOWLEDGING, AND I THINK
IT'S ALWAYS IMPORTANT TO
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HASN'T KEPT UP THEIR
END OF THE BARGAIN, NOT COMING
CLOSE TO FUNDING THE 40% OF
SPECIAL ED COSTS THAT IS IN THE
LAW. CAN I ASK YOU FOR A FINAL
COMMENT, PLEASE? SO WITH THAT
SAID, AND I'LL PUT THIS IN THE
CATEGORY FOR A TOPIC FOR ANOTHER
DAY, BUT WE WOULD BE REMISS THAT
YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT LCFF
WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT THE LCAP.
AND THIS IS ONE OF THE
PERSPECTIVES THAT COMES UP IN
EVERY CONVERSATION FROM OUR
MEMBERS. AND I'LL JUST LEAVE YOU
WITH ONE, ONE, ONE STORY. I WAS
PART LIKE MANY OF US, IN THOSE
CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR LEADERS
WHEN WE WERE THINKING ABOUT
LCFF. AND THERE WAS NUMEROUS
OFFICIALS IN THE ADMINISTRATION
WHO ENVISIONED, WHEN WE TALKED
ABOUT THE LCAP, THAT IT WAS
GOING TO BE A 3 TO 4 PAGE
DOCUMENT THAT WOULD BE EASY TO
SUMMARIZE AND THINK ABOUT THE
COMMUNITY. I THINK IT GOES
WITHOUT SAYING. WE ALL KNOW THAT
THAT HASN'T BEEN THE CASE. SO WE
WILL LOOK FORWARD TO THOSE
CONVERSATIONS ON HOW TO
STREAMLINE THOSE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS, ESPECIALLY FOR OUR
SMALLER DISTRICTS WHO DON'T HAVE
THE CAPACITY TO DEAL WITH ALL
THOSE REQUIREMENTS. SO IN
CLOSING, I JUST WANT TO THANK
THE COMMITTEE FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY, AND WE LOOK FORWARD
TO BEING PART OF THE
CONVERSATIONS MOVING FORWARD.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS
HERE TODAY. WE ARE NOW GOING TO
MOVE ON TO KATI HARDIMAN, WHO IS
THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION REPRESENTATIVE.
WELCOME. GOOD MORNING. THANKS
FOR HAVING US IN THIS IMPORTANT
CONVERSATION THIS MORNING. KATI
HARDIMAN WITH THE CALIFORNIA
TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, CTA IS A
STRONG SUPPORTER OF THE LCFF AND
THE GOALS OF BOTH IMPROVING
OUTCOMES AND SUPPORT FOR
STUDENTS THAT NEED AND DESERVE
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, AS WELL AS
PROVIDING FOR THE NEEDS OF ALL
STUDENTS. YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE
IN EQUITABLE FUNDING. FORMULA IS
ESSENTIAL IN LEVELING THE
PLAYING FIELD FOR STUDENTS AND
WHILE WE'VE MADE SOME PROGRESS
AND WE'VE SEEN MANY BRIGHT SPOTS
ACROSS THE STATE SINCE THE LCFF
WAS ENACTED, AS YOU KNOW, THE
RESEARCH AND DOCTOR JOHNSON LAID
OUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE MORE WORK
TO DO TO MAKE MORE PROGRESS.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT TRULY
ACHIEVE OUR GOALS OF EQUITY
WITHOUT SUFFICIENT FUNDING IN
THE FORMULA. AND I KNOW WE'RE
GOING TO GET INTO THIS A LITTLE
BIT MORE IN THE NEXT PANEL, BUT
WE BELIEVE IT'S FUNDAMENTAL TO
THE SUCCESS OF THE LCFF. AND AS
A REMINDER, THIS WHEN THE STATE
ENACTED THE LCFF, WE CREATED
FUNDING TARGETS, TARGETS FUNDED
OVER SEVERAL YEARS. SO WHILE THE
STATE ADOPTED THE NEW FORMULA IN
2013, IT WAS NOT FULLY FUNDED
UNTIL 2018 AND THEN
ADDITIONALLY, YOU KNOW, THESE
TARGETS WERE BASED ON HISTORIC
FUNDING LEVELS, NOT SORT OF
ADEQUACY OR NEEDS THAT STUDENTS
NEED AND DESERVE. SO JUST WANTED
TO PROVIDE THAT SORT OF BACKDROP
THERE AND THEN, YOU KNOW,
ADDITIONALLY, WE RECOGNIZE THIS
IS A FORMULA AND NOT A REVENUE
SOURCE. WE CAN'T YOU KNOW, IT'S
HARD TO TALK ABOUT POTENTIAL
CHANGES TO THE FORMULA. YOU
KNOW, WHEN THE ENTIRE FUNDING
FORMULA IS UNDERFUNDED AND SO
DESPITE RECENT INVESTMENTS, WE
STILL HAVE, YOU KNOW, AN
UNDERFUNDED, UNDERFUNDED SYSTEM.
AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, AS OTHERS
HAVE MENTIONED ON, YOU KNOW, THE
SPENDING DECISIONS THAT THE
STATE AND THE CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEM IS REALLY IMPORTANT IN
ALL OF THESE CONVERSATIONS AND
IMPROVING OUTCOMES. SO I'LL
LEAVE IT THERE. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. I WILL MADE I'VE MADE A
DECISION IN READING ALL THE
DOCUMENTS LEADING TO TONIGHT. I
THINK PANEL TWO IS VERY GERMANE
TO THE PANEL ONE. SO I WAS GOING
TO ASK THEM TO COME UP AND SPEAK
AND THEN BUT I'D ASK ALL OF YOU
TO STICK AROUND BECAUSE I KNOW I
HAVE QUESTIONS FOR EACH AND
EVERY ONE OF YOU, BUT IF ANY OF
THE COLLEAGUES HAVE QUESTIONS
SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS PANEL,
ALSO HAPPY TO TAKE THOSE
QUESTIONS. NOW, IF YOU FEEL LIKE
YOU HAVE TO TAKE MR. MURATSUCHI,
YOU WANT TO ASK A QUESTION OF
THIS PANEL. ALL RIGHT. GO AHEAD.
THANK YOU. YES, I, I MEAN, I
YEAH, I'M NOT SURE HOW IT WOULD.
YOU KNOW, BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
NEXT PANEL. AND SO I JUST WANT
TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY I, I DO
HAVE A FEW. SO FIRST OF ALL
PROFESSOR JOHNSON. I WAS TRYING
TO YOU HAVE A BIGGER SLIDE DECK
THAN WHAT YOU FOCUSED ON IN YOUR
PRESENTATION. AND SO I WAS
TRYING TO FRANTICALLY KEEP UP
WITH YOU, BUT YOU HAD ONE SLIDE
THAT TALKS ABOUT EXPLAINING THE
84 TO 95% VARIATION IN SCHOOL
SPENDING EFFECTIVENESS, AND AM I
CORRECT IN UNDERSTANDING THAT
THESE FIVE POINTS THAT YOU
IDENTIFY ARE THE MOST EFFECTIVE
WAYS IN WHICH THE CONCENTRATION
AND SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDS ARE SPENT
TO HELP CLOSE THE ACHIEVEMENT
GAP? OKAY. YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME?
YES, THAT THAT IS CORRECT.
MEANING WHEN THIS IS IMPORTANT
BECAUSE REFORM THE REFORM IS
DISTINCTIVE IN ITS MULTI-YEAR
DESIGN. PRE-COMMITTING FUNDS.
AND SO DISTRICTS WERE ASSURED
THAT IT WOULD NOT BE TEMPORARY,
REVERSIBLE CHANGE AND COULD PLAN
LONG TERM TRANSFORMATIVE
INITIATIVES RATHER THAN ONE OFF
EXPENDITURES. IN THE CONTEXT OF
LIKE THE PANDEMIC, WHEN YOU HAVE
LIKE A FEDERAL COMMITMENT OF
PANDEMIC FUNDS, THAT'S ONE YEAR
DISTRICTS RECEIVE DISTRICT
LEADERS RECEIVE THAT MONEY AND
USUALLY ALLOCATE IT TO BUILDINGS
LIKE A ONE OFF EXPENDITURE. THEY
DON'T ALLOCATE IT TO INSTRUCTION
CENTERED SPENDING, BECAUSE IF
THEY HIRE MORE TEACHERS, THEY
KNOW THEY'LL HAVE TO INCUR
TEACHER LAYOFFS BECAUSE IT'S A
REOCCURRING EXPENSE. SO THE
IMPORTANCE OF A COMMITMENT OF
SUSTAINED INVESTMENT IS IT
CHANGES HOW DISTRICTS CHOOSE TO
THEN ALLOCATE THE FUNDS. AND WE
FINDING DISTRICT INSTRUCTION
CENTERED SPENDING IS ONE OF THE
MOST CRITICAL PARTS THAT IS
BOOSTING THE STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT. WHEN THEY ALLOCATED
A PENSION DEBT. BUILDINGS.
ADMINISTRATIVE SALARIES. WE DID
NOT SEE THIS SIGNIFICANT BOOST
IN ACHIEVEMENT IN THE WAYS THAT
WE SAW IT WHEN IT WAS ALLOCATED
TO CLASS SIZE REDUCTIONS,
TEACHER SALARY, TEACHER THAT IN
COMBINATION REDUCED TEACHER
TURNOVER. YES. OKAY. I MEAN, I
APPRECIATE THAT, BUT WHAT THESE
FIVE CATEGORIES OF MOST
EFFECTIVE SCHOOL SPENDING WITH
THE WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL
DOLLARS, I MEAN, IT APPEARS TO
ME THAT THESE LIKE ESPECIALLY
CLASS SIZE TEACHER SALARIES AND
MAYBE TEACHER TURNOVER IS
RELATED TO BOTH CLASS SIZE AND
TEACHER SALARIES. BUT. THOSE
THREE, IT'S MY GENERAL
UNDERSTANDING THAT THOSE WOULD
BE DISTRICT WIDE. YOU KNOW,
INVESTMENTS RATHER THAN FOCUSING
ON SCHOOL SITES WHERE THE
POVERTY LEVEL OR THE L NUMBERS
ARE THE HIGHEST. WOULD YOU
AGREE? WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST
THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, IN HIGH
CONCENTRATED POVERTY SCHOOLS,
SOMETIMES THE TEACHER TURNOVER
IS AS HIGH AS 1 IN 2 TEACHERS
LEAVING THE PROFESSION IN THE
FIRST FIVE YEARS. THE KIND OF
ABILITY TO INVEST CREATES A
CULTURE AND SYSTEM WHERE YOU'RE
NOT ONLY ABLE TO ATTRACT HIGH
QUALITY TEACHERS, BUT YOU'RE
ABLE TO DEVELOP AND RECRUIT AND
SUSTAIN THAT. SO IF YOU REDUCE
CLASS SIZES, BUT THE SMALLER
CLASS SIZES ARE TAUGHT BY
INEXPERIENCED TEACHERS, WITHOUT
THE CREDENTIAL, WITHOUT THE
EFFECTIVENESS, THEN THOSE
SMALLER CLASS SIZES DON'T
ACTUALLY LEAD TO THOSE KIND OF
IMPROVEMENTS. SO IT'S THE
COMBINATION OF SMALLER CLASS
SIZES WITH EXPERIENCED TEACHERS.
NØ I IN COMBINATION NOT LIKE ONE
AT A TIME. SURE. I MEAN, YEAH, I
MEAN, ALL OF THESE OBVIOUSLY
INTERACT WITH WITH EACH OTHER.
BUT I GUESS MY POINT IS, YOU
KNOW, IN FOCUSING ON THE, THE
POINT THAT DOCTOR KIRSCH AND
OTHERS HAVE HAVE MADE THAT
DEBATE ABOUT WHETHER THE
INVESTMENTS SHOULD BE DISTRICT
WIDE VERSUS SCHOOL SITE FOCUSED,
THAT YOU KNOW, LIKE, FOR
EXAMPLE, LA UNIFIED. MY
UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, YOU KNOW,
YOU KNOW, THE, YOU KNOW, OUR
LOCAL TEACHERS UNIONS ARE VERY
MUCH AGAINST DIFFERENTIATED
SALARIES BASED ON WHERE YOU
TEACH. AND SO YOU KNOW, THE, THE
GIVEN THAT YOUR AVERAGE SCHOOL
DISTRICT IS SPENDING 80, 85% OF
THEIR, THEIR REVENUES ON
SALARIES AND BENEFITS, AND, YOU
KNOW, THE, THE INVESTMENTS OF
THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION DOLLARS APPEAR TO
ME TO BE DISTRICT WIDE
INVESTMENTS RATHER THAN SCHOOL
SITE FOCUSED INVESTMENTS. I
THINK THAT'S AN ASTUTE
OBSERVATION. I THINK WHAT I'M
ONLY EMPHASIZING HERE IS THAT
THIS BALANCE BETWEEN AUTONOMY
AND ACCOUNTABILITY MEANS THAT WE
HAVE TO KEEP OUR EYES ON THE
INTRA DISTRICT RESOURCE
ALLOCATION DECISIONS THAT DO
AFFECT EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY
WITHIN THE DISTRICT AND THE ESA
REQUIREMENTS, FOR EXAMPLE,
REQUIRE SCHOOLS TO REPORT
SPENDING AT THE SCHOOL LEVEL,
NOT JUST AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL.
AND SO OUR ABILITY TO TRY TO
ACCOUNT FOR THE SCHOOL SPENDING
IN STANDARDIZED WAYS SO THAT WE
CAN ENSURE THAT THE RESOURCES
ARE NOT BEING INEQUITABLY
DISTRIBUTED WITHIN THE DISTRICT,
IS CERTAINLY A THING THAT WILL
REQUIRE CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT.
AND OUR OUR EYES AND ATTENTION
AS RESEARCHERS, PRACTITIONERS
AND POLICYMAKERS. SO I
DEFINITELY THINK THAT THAT'S
TRUE. CAN I JUST SAY ONE LAST
THING, WHICH IS THE SYNERGY
BETWEEN TK AND THIS LCFF
INCREASED INCREASES IN SPENDING,
MEANING THE INCREASES IN SCHOOL
READINESS THAT TK WERE ABLE TO
PRODUCE ARE ABLE TO BE SUSTAINED
THROUGH THE EARLY ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL SPENDING. BUT REMEMBER,
THE LCFF FUNDING FORMULA WAS
REALLY DESIGNED IN A PRE-K
ENVIRONMENT. SO WE WANT TO KIND
OF THINK ABOUT HOW WE ENSURE
THAT THE INTER ACTION BETWEEN
THE EARLY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
SPENDING AND THE TK KIND OF ARE
ABLE TO CONTINUE TO COMPLEMENT
EACH OTHER IN THE FUNDING
FORMULA, CAN HELP IN THAT WAY.
AND I SAY THAT BECAUSE THAT'S
REALLY HAPPENING AT THE SCHOOL
AND CLASSROOM LEVEL, NOT JUST AT
THE DISTRICT LEVEL. AND SO THOSE
ARE THINGS THAT I THINK WE'VE
SEEN IN THE DATA, THE SYNERGY
BETWEEN TK AND THE LCFF INDUCED
INCREASES IN EARLY ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL SPENDING. SORRY. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. THIS IS
DEFINITELY NOT INTENDED TO CUT
OFF CONVERSATION. WE'RE GOING TO
HAVE A VERY ROBUST LENGTHY AFTER
THE NEXT PANEL. IT JUST THERE'S
SO MUCH MATERIAL THAT REALLY
GOES TOGETHER THAT I THINK IT
JUST MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE FOR
US TO DO THAT. EVEN THOUGH THE
AGENDA WAS REALLY WELL LAID OUT
ORIGINALLY, I THINK SO LET'S IF
I CAN ASK, I THINK ONLY ONE OF
THE PANELISTS RIGHT NOW IS
STAYING. THAT'S MISS HARDEMAN.
OTHERWISE, I'LL ASK THE NEXT
PANEL TO COME FORWARD AND THEN
WE'LL TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE
SITUATE ALL OF YOU FOR THE
DISCUSSIONS AND QUESTIONS FROM
MEMBERS. AS SOON AS THIS PANEL
IS COMPLETE FOR PANEL ONE AND
PANEL TWO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME. THANK YOU. PLEASE DON'T GO
TOO FAR. YES, BECAUSE I HAVE I
HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ALL OF THE
YEAH I DO. TWO PANELISTS. THANK
YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND WE'RE GOING
TO BEGIN WITH MR. LEVIN WITH THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTES OF RESEARCH.
YOU ARE READY. WE ARE READY FOR
YOU. THANK YOU. AND PLEASE
PROCEED. OKAY. GREAT. FIRST OF
ALL, THANKS SO MUCH FOR HAVING
ME. I'M GOING TO TRY TO GO
THROUGH THESE SLIDES PRETTY
QUICKLY AND STICK TO MY TIME. I
WANT TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF
BACKGROUND WHO YOU'RE TALKING TO
HERE JESSE LEVIN I'M A PRINCIPAL
RESEARCH ECONOMIST WITH THE
AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR
RESEARCH. I'VE BEEN WORKING ON
ISSUES OF ADEQUACY AND EQUITY
FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS IN MANY, MANY
STATES. I'M ALSO A NATIVE
CALIFORNIAN AND WAS HAVE GONE
THROUGH MY SCHOOLING CAREER
THROUGH K-12 AND UNIVERSITY IN
IN CALIFORNIA. AND IN ADDITION,
I DIDN'T PUT THIS DOWN HERE, BUT
I HAVE TWO, TWO SONS WHO ARE
BOTH IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN
CALIFORNIA. I ALSO CURRENTLY
SERVE ON THE CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
TECHNICAL ADVISORY BOARD. I WAS
PREVIOUSLY A MEMBER OF THE
CALIFORNIA PRACTITIONER ADVISORY
GROUP, AND I DID A TERM AS A
SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE IN MY LOCAL
DISTRICT, PACIFICA SCHOOL
DISTRICT. SO THIS IS ALL PRETTY
CLOSE TO MY HEART AND I LOVE ALL
THE CONVERSATION THAT THAT I'VE
HEARD THUS FAR. AGREE WITH JUST
ABOUT ALL OF IT. SO I WANTED TO
GO OVER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT ABOUT
MY RESEARCH AND WHAT MY WORK
DOES. I GO INTO STATES AND WORK
WITH STATES TO TRY TO EXAMINE
AND IMPROVE THEIR SCHOOL FUNDING
MECHANISMS. AND THERE ARE TWO
KEY GOALS OF ANY FUNDING.
FORMULA ONE IS REALLY AN
ADEQUACY GOAL. I KNOW WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT, OH, LET'S TRY TO
LIMIT LIMIT THE TALK ABOUT
ADEQUACY. BUT YOU KNOW,
ADEQUACY. I ALWAYS PUT IT IN
SIMPLE TERMS. HOW LARGE MUST THE
PIE BE IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ALL
STUDENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET
THE STATE'S EDUCATIONAL GOALS
AND THIS HAS TO BE REGARDLESS OF
WHAT A STUDENT'S NEEDS OR
CIRCUMSTANCES ARE, WHERE THEY
ATTEND SCHOOL. THE SECOND KEY
GOAL IS EQUITY AND EQUITY IS YOU
HAVE TO APPROPRIATELY DISTRIBUTE
THESE DOLLARS TO ALLOW FOR THIS
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL
STUDENTS TO ACHIEVE AT SOME
COMMON LEVEL, AND THAT LEVEL CAN
BE ADEQUATE OR LESS THAN
ADEQUATE. HOWEVER YOU DEFINE
THAT NOW IN ORDER TO MEET THESE
GOALS, YOU NEED ACCURATE
ESTIMATES OF WHAT THE
DIFFERENTIAL COST OF PRODUCING
OUTCOMES ARE FOR DIFFERENT TYPES
OF STUDENTS WHO LEARN IN
DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS. SO THOSE
ARE THE TWO KEY GOALS. AND I
JUST WANT TO KIND OF MOTIVATE
THE REST OF MY TALK WITH WITH,
WITH WHAT I'M GOING TO CALL COST
FACTORS. AND I HAVE NOT BEEN
I'VE NOT BEEN CYCLING MY SLIDES,
HAVE I? I DON'T EVEN SEE IF THE
SLIDES ARE UP THERE. WE'RE GOING
TO GET THEM UP. BUT THE PANEL
DOES HAVE YOUR SLIDES SO NO
WORRIES. I'M ON SLIDE FOUR FOR
THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE THIS SO
COST FACTORS ARE SIMPLY
CHARACTERISTICS THAT INFLUENCE
THE COST OF PROVIDING OR OF
GENERATING STUDENT OUTCOMES, BUT
ARE OUTSIDE OF A DISTRICT'S
CONTROL. AND THERE ARE SOME VERY
IMPORTANT CATEGORIES OF COST
FACTORS THAT, THAT, THAT WE USE
IN THESE STUDIES. AND THE FIRST
IS STUDENT NEEDS. AND WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT STUDENT NEEDS A LOT
HERE. THERE'S BEEN LESS TALK, IF
ANY, ABOUT SCALE AND SPARSITY.
SO WE RECOGNIZE THAT SCHOOLS ARE
SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS ARE UNITS
OF PRODUCTION OR ARE PRODUCING
ORGANIZATIONS. AND IT BECOMES ON
AVERAGE CHEAPER TO PRODUCE
OUTCOMES. THE LARGER IS THE
SCALE OF PRODUCTION. SO IN THE
CONTEXT OF LCFF, WE DO HAVE THIS
SMALL SCHOOLS ADJUSTMENT, RIGHT.
SO THAT IS REALLY AN ADJUSTMENT
FOR DISECONOMIES OF SCALE. WE
ALSO LOOK AT THINGS LIKE
POPULATION SPARSITY OR THE
DEGREE TO WHICH A DISTRICT OR
SCHOOLS ARE RURAL VERSUS URBAN.
NOW WE ALSO LOOK AT PROGRAMMATIC
ADJUSTMENTS AND WE HAVE SOME OF
THOSE IN LCFF AS WELL. GRADE
RANGE. AND TK JUST CAME UP AS
WELL. AND THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE
OF SOMETHING THAT WE MIGHT ALL
THINK ABOUT. HOW DO WE
APPROPRIATELY DIFFERENTIALLY
FUND THOSE THOSE, THOSE, THOSE
SCHOOLS THAT ARE OFFERING MORE
TK OR LESS TK. AND THEN FINALLY
THE PRICE LEVEL OF INPUTS OR THE
GEOGRAPHIC VARIATION OF WHAT IT
COSTS TO ATTRACT AND RETAIN
TEACHERS AND OTHER EDUCATIONAL
STAFF, THIS IS A KEY COST FACTOR
THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT. AND THAT CAME UP
EARLIER. I JUST WANTED TO LAY
THESE OUT ON THE TABLE FOR
EVERYBODY. SO AND HERE IS THE
NEXT SLIDE. I'M NOT SURE IF
THAT'S CYCLING. THERE IT IS
OKAY. SO I'M JUST GOING TO
REITERATE LCFF WAS REVOLUTIONARY
IN CALIFORNIA. MY LITTLE NOTE
HERE SAYS IT REALLY MARKED A
PATH OUT OF AN OVERLY RESTRICTED
DARK FOREST OF CATEGORICAL
FUNDING PROGRAMS. AND IT
RESULTED. IT RESULTED IN
IMPROVEMENTS IN TERMS OF EQUITY
ACROSS DISTRICTS, CERTAINLY
IMPROVED THE AUTONOMY WITH WHICH
DISTRICTS HAD HAD HAD CONTROL
OVER THE MEANS TO SUCCESS. THEIR
RESOURCES. AND IT COULD BE SAID
THAT IT ALSO IMPROVED
TRANSPARENCY, THAT WE HAVE A
BETTER IDEA OF HOW FUNDING GETS
TO INDIVIDUAL DISTRICTS AND WHY
DISTRICT ONE DISTRICT HAS MORE
FUNDING THAN ANOTHER DISTRICT.
SO, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THE
STUDENT, THE STUDENT NEEDS
WAITING HERE, WE ALL KNOW ABOUT
THE THREE TRADITIONALLY
UNDERSERVED GROUPS, STUDENTS
ELIGIBLE FOR FREE OR REDUCED
PRICE MEALS, ENGLISH LEARNERS
AND FOSTER YOUTH. THIS IS MY. I
GUESS THE LAST THING THAT I
WANTED TO SAY IS OUR OUR
ESTABLISHMENT OF LCFF. WE JOINED
A LOT OF OTHER STATES THAT HAVE
THESE WEIGHTED STUDENT FUNDING
FORMULAS, 38 OTHER STATES
CURRENTLY USE THESE THESE TYPES
OF WEIGHTS AND HAVE A SETUP.
THIS IS THE MOST BASIC HERE THAT
THE ONE FORMULA THAT I'M GOING
TO SHOW YOU IS A BASE PER PUPIL
FUNDING AMOUNT. THAT WOULD BE
REALLY OUR OUR BASE, OUR BASE
GRANT RATE TIMES SOME WEIGHTED
NUMBER OF PUPILS. AND THAT'S THE
WAY ALL OF THESE ARE SET UP. AND
YOU CAN HAVE A LOT OF OTHER
ADJUSTMENTS FOR THOSE OTHER COST
FACTORS THAT THAT I TALKED
ABOUT. AND THOSE COULD BE
THROUGH WEIGHTING YOUR YOUR
NUMBERS OF PUPILS OR THROUGH
OTHER MEANS. SO THIS IS WHERE I
WANT TO GET US ALL THINKING
ABOUT HOW CAN WE IMPROVE LCFF IN
THE FUTURE. AND I HAVE TWO
QUESTIONS FOR EVERYBODY TO BE
THINKING ABOUT. THE FIRST IS,
ARE THE COMPONENTS OF LCFF TRULY
COST BASED? THAT IS, DO THEY
REPRESENT AN ACCURATE
DIFFERENTIAL COST OF PRODUCING
OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS WITH
DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS, LEARNING
AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS? ONE PART
OF THAT IS THE IS THE BASE RATE
HIGH ENOUGH. SO THESE WOULD BE
FOR OUR STUDENTS THAT HAVE NO
ADDITIONAL NEEDS. THOSE WHO ARE
NOT TRADITIONALLY UNDERSERVED.
AND THIS IS WHERE MY TALK BLEEDS
OVER A LITTLE BIT INTO INTO
ADEQUACY. RIGHT. IS THAT BASE
RATE ENOUGH? AND OF COURSE, THE
BASE RATE IS WHAT DRIVES THESE
DIFFERENTIAL FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS
AS WELL. SO IT'S VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE
THE GRADE LEVEL ADJUSTMENTS THAT
ARE THROUGH THE BASE RATE.
RIGHT. SO WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT
WHETHER THE ADJUSTMENTS FOR THE
DIFFERENT SCHOOLING LEVELS AND
INCLUDING TK NOW ARE
APPROPRIATE. THAT IS, DO THEY
REPRESENT THE DIFFERENTIAL COST
OF PRODUCING A SIMILAR LEVEL OF
OUTCOME FOR THESE THESE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROGRAMING
THAT ARE BEING OFFERED? CAN I
ASK YOU FOR A FINAL COMMENT? OH
YEAH. LOTS OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU
TOO. WOW. OH OF COURSE. SO MY
FINAL COMMENT IS, WELL, YOU'VE
ALREADY HEARD ABOUT COSTS. OR
FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS. THE OTHER
THING, THE OTHER QUESTION THAT I
HAVE FOR ALL OF YOU IS ARE THERE
ANY ADJUSTMENTS, COST FACTORS
THAT ARE MISSING. AND ONE Kò
COST FACTOR IS REALLY GEOGRAPHIC
VARIATION IN THE PRICE LEVELS.
OKAY. THE ONE ONE RESULT, I JUST
WENT INTO THE COMPARABLE WAGE
INDEX, WHICH IS A DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION PRODUCT, AND I DID A
LITTLE DIGGING AND SHOWED THAT
WE HAVE HUGE VARIATION IN
CALIFORNIA IN TERMS OF WHAT IT
COSTS TO HIRE AND RETAIN
EDUCATIONAL STAFF IN IN BELLEVUE
ELEMENTARY, IT COSTS 27% LESS
THAN THE STATE AVERAGE VERSUS IN
SAN FRANCISCO. THIS IS BASED ON
2021 FIGURES. SAN FRANCISCO IT
COSTS 21% MORE. NOW THESE ARE
THIS IS A FACTOR THAT'S OUTSIDE
OF THE CONTROL OF THE DISTRICT,
LARGELY OKAY. THE WAY THAT THIS
IS MEASURED HERE AND SO WE
SHOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER Ã
IMPLEMENTING SOME SORT OF
ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT THAT
ACCOUNTS FOR THIS COST FACTOR.
I'LL STOP THERE. THERE'S A LOT
MORE. YOU HAVE THE SLIDE SHOW.
AND TO THAT LAST POINT THAT WAS
JUST MADE, THAT WAS ALSO RAISED
IN THE PREVIOUS PANEL, WHICH IS
WHY I THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT
TO HAVE ALL OF YOU SPEAK. SO OUR
NEXT PANELIST IS MIKE FINE WITH
FISCAL CRISIS MANAGEMENT
ASSISTANT TEAM VIC MATT. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRS AND
MEMBERS. HAPPY TO BE WITH YOU
THIS MORNING. MIKE FINE, THE
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE
STATE'S FISCAL CRISIS AND
MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE TEAM. I'M
GOING TO ECHO SOME OF THE
COMMENTS YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD,
AND PROBABLY WE'LL HEAR LATER
THIS MORNING. I'M GOING TO DO
THAT THROUGH TALKING ABOUT SOME
PRINCIPLES AND THEN TALK ABOUT
SOME SPECIFICS. THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA DOES NOT
NEED A MAJOR OVERHAUL. SIMPLY A
FEW ADJUSTMENTS THAT WILL
IMPROVE BOTH ITS RELEVANCY AND
ADEQUACY TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT
CALIFORNIA STUDENTS. THE BASIC
BUILDING BLOCKS OF THE LCFF ARE
STRONG AND ACCOMPLISHING THE
ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF THE DESIGN.
WE NEED TO LEVERAGE THE
FORMULA'S STRENGTHS WHILE BEING
CAREFUL NOT TO HARM ITS BASIC
DESIGN. ADEQUACY IS IMPORTANT
FOR LOGICAL REASONS, BUT ALSO
CONTRIBUTES TO FISCAL STABILITY,
AN AREA THAT FCMAT CERTAINLY
FOCUSES ON. BUT IT'S ALSO
IMPORTANT TO REINFORCE THE
THOUGHT. AND MR. BROOKS OR MR.
ALLEN SAID THIS EARLIER, IT'S IN
IMPORTANT TO REINFORCE THE
THOUGHT THAT THE STRENGTH IN THE
SUCCESS OF THE FORMULA SHOULD
NOT BE JUDGED ON THE SUCCESS OR
LACK THEREOF, OF ADEQUACY. WHILE
THESE HEARINGS ARE NOT FOCUSED
ON THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING
FORMULA, I'M SORRY, THE LOCAL
CONTROL AND ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN.
I DO BELIEVE I DO NOT BELIEVE
THAT WE CAN HAVE A COMPLETE
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE FORMULA
WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT THE LCAP
ITSELF. THE CHAIRS WILL
UNDOUBTEDLY ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT
THE FLOW OF FUNDS TO SUPPORT
STUDENT NEEDS, AND HOW THE FUNDS
REACH STUDENTS TO CLOSE THE
ACHIEVEMENT GAP. THE LCAP IS
WHAT TIES THE FORMULA TO
STUDENTS. SOME OF THE
ADJUSTMENTS I'M RECOMMENDING WE
EXPLORE DURING THIS ANALYSIS
WILL IMPROVE ADEQUACY, BUT
ULTIMATELY, ADEQUACY IS ABOUT
SUFFICIENT INPUT OF FUNDS TO THE
FORMULA. AN ADEQUATE BASE GRANT
WOULD RELIEVE MUCH OF THE
VARIANCE, CONFLICT AND CHALLENGE
WE SEE IN DISTRICTS TODAY, WHO
GO TO GREAT LENGTHS TO JUSTIFY
USING THEIR SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDS FOR
BASIC SERVICES, AS OPPOSED TO
THE EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS TO BETTER
SERVE HISTORICALLY
UNDERPERFORMING STUDENTS.
LIKEWISE, AN ADEQUATE BASE GRANT
WOULD BETTER SUPPORT SPECIAL
EDUCATION FORMULA THROUGH AB 602
MASTER PLAN FUNDING AB 602. AS
YOU KNOW, PROVIDES AN
INCREMENTAL INCREASE IN FUNDING,
RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR HIGHER
SERVICE LEVELS FOR OUR SPECIAL
ED STUDENTS. WHILE MANY COMPLAIN
THAT FUNDING FOR SPECIAL ED IS
INADEQUATE AND IT IS, WE NEED TO
REMEMBER THAT SPECIAL ED
STUDENTS GENERATE LCFF FUNDS
FIRST AND THEN AB 602 FUNDS
SECOND, ADDING AN INCREMENT TO
AN ALREADY INADEQUATE LCFF RATE
DOESN'T MAKE UP FOR INADEQUACY.
MY LIST OF SUGGESTED MECHANICAL
ADJUSTMENTS INCLUDE THESE.
FIRST, AND SEVERAL HAVE ALLUDED
TO THIS THE COST OF LIVING
ADJUSTMENT, OR COLA. THE LONG
STANDING COLA THAT WE USE TODAY
PREDATES THE LCFF, SO IT'S BEEN
IN USE FOR 35 YEARS OR SO AND
WAS NOT A COMPONENT OF LCFF. BUT
THE CALCULATION OF COLA USES A
NATIONAL METRIC TO REPRESENT THE
CHANGING COST OF GOVERNMENT
GOODS AND SERVICES. THIS MAY OR
MAY NOT BE REFLECTIVE OF THE
CHANGING COSTS FOR CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND CLASSROOMS.
YEAR OVER YEAR. COLA IS THE
FUNDING MECHANISM USED TO COVER
INCREASED ANNUAL COSTS, ASSUMING
CASELOAD AND PROGRAM REMAINS THE
SAME. ANNUAL COLA ADJUSTMENTS
ARE USED TO COVER STEP AND
COLUMN INCREASES IN SALARY.
SALARY INCREASES IN HEALTH
BENEFITS, INCREASES IN EMPLOYER
CONTRIBUTIONS TO CALSTRS AND
PERS, AND INCREASES IN UTILITY
AND ENERGY COSTS ALL AS
EXAMPLES. IT'S TIME TO EXPLORE
THE USE OF A CALIFORNIA SPECIFIC
METRIC. AND GIVEN THAT 85% OF
SCHOOL DISTRICT EXPENSES ARE
LABOR RELATED, A CALIFORNIA
METRIC THAT IS HEAVILY
INFLUENCED BY LABOR COST
ELEMENTS THAT WOULD ALIGN COLA
TO WHAT SCHOOLS ACTUALLY
EXPERIENCE AND THE CHALLENGE
THAT THEY HAVE IN SUPPORTING
THEIR CLASSROOMS AS PART OF THE
EXPLORATION OF A MORE
APPROPRIATE COLA. WE SHOULD TALK
ABOUT REGIONALIZED COLAS OR
GEOGRAPHIC ADJUSTMENTS. DOCTOR
KIRSCH MENTIONED THIS, SOMETHING
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT FOR A LONG
TIME, BUT REALLY NEVER GOTTEN
TRACTION. ONE OF THE POSITIVE
ATTRIBUTES, THOUGH, OF THE LCFF
IS THAT THE BASE RATE IS THE
SAME BY GRADE SPAN FOR ALL
DISTRICTS. THIS IS AN
IMPROVEMENT OVER THE FORMER
REVENUE LIMITS, WHICH VARIED BY
DISTRICT. REGIONALIZED COLAS
WOULD CREATE A VARIANCE IN THE
BASE RATES, WHICH GO AGAINST AN
IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE IN THE LCFF
BASE RATE. SO WE NEED TO BALANCE
THE NEED FOR REGIONALIZED
CONSIDERATION AGAINST THIS IDEA
OF CONSISTENCY. GEOGRAPHIC
ADJUSTMENTS MAY NOT BE
APPROPRIATE FOR HIGH, MAY NOT
ONLY BE APPROPRIATE FOR JUST
HIGHER COST AREAS, BUT ALSO
SHOULD CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS
COMMON IN RURAL AND NECESSARY
SMALL SCHOOLS, AND POTENTIALLY
DISTRICTS WITH OTHER
CHARACTERISTICS. SECOND AREA
WOULD BE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT RATES. THE
CURRENT RATES FOR SUPPLEMENTAL
AND CONCENTRATION GRANTS AT 20%
AND 50%, RESPECTIVELY, WERE NOT
BASED ON RESEARCH AT THE TIME WE
ADOPTED THE LCFF. I BELIEVE THE
SUPPLEMENTAL RATE, WHICH SERVES
ALL UNDUPLICATED STUDENTS, IS
TOO LOW, UNDUPLICATED DATA BY
SITE RATHER THAN DISTRICT. THIS
IS ALSO A TOPIC THAT'S ALREADY
BEEN RAISED. WE'VE BEGUN TO
IMPLEMENT ADD ONS AND OTHER
PROGRAM FUNDING BASED ON SITE
METRICS. IT IS TIME TO CONSIDER
THE SAME FOR LCA. IS IT TIME TO
CONSIDER THE SAME FOR LCFF IS MY
QUESTION. DISCUSSION SHOULD TAKE
PLACE ABOUT THE PROS AND THE
CONS AND THE IMPACTS ON THE
EQUITY RELATED GOALS OF THE LCFF
FOR FUNDING UNDUPLICATED
STUDENTS BASED ON THE NUMBER AND
CONCENTRATION BY SCHOOL SITE,
RATHER THAN NUMBER AND
CONCENTRATION BY DISTRICT. THERE
IS NO QUESTION THAT ONE OF THE
CONS OF THIS APPROACH IS THAT
AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE WOULD
ALSO NEED TO BE COMPUTED, AND
REPORTED BY SITE, AND THE
FUNDING WOULD NEED TO BE
COMPUTED BY SITE INSTEAD OF THE
DISTRICT CREATING A SIGNIFICANT
CHANGE IN DATA COLLECTION AND
ALLOCATION MECHANICS AND THE
RESULTING WORKLOAD IMPACTS AT
BOTH THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL.
MR. FINE, A COUPLE FINISHING
COMMENTS HERE. PLEASE. SURE, I
WILL JUST HIGHLIGHT MY OTHER
POINTS TO CONSIDER. ONE IS THE
METRIC TO BE USED FOR POVERTY. I
THINK OTHER PANEL MEMBERS WILL
TOUCH ON THAT TODAY.
UNDUPLICATED STUDENTS DO WE HAVE
THE RIGHT UNDUPLICATED STUDENTS?
SHOULD SOME BE DUPLICATED?
SHOULD WE DISTINGUISH BETWEEN
LONG TERM ENGLISH LEARNERS
VERSUS ENGLISH LEARNERS, MIGRANT
STUDENTS? AND SO ON? LCFF ADD
ONS. THE LEÓN REPORTED ON THIS
LAST SPRING AS PART OF OUR
DISCUSSION ABOUT PROP 98
CHALLENGES IN THE CURRENT
BUDGET, AND I DON'T THINK IT GOT
THE TRACTION IT NEEDED, BUT
WOULD CERTAINLY RECOMMEND YOU
REVISIT THE LÀ RECOMMENDATION.
ARE THOSE ADD ONS THAT WE PUT IN
PLACE ON DAY ONE STILL RELEVANT
TODAY? AND THEN FINALLY I WOULD
HIGHLIGHT AND RUCKER DID THIS AS
WELL. THE TK VERSUS TK THROUGH
THREE GRADE SPAN OF FUNDING. WE
HAVE SOME UNINTENDED ADVERSE
CONSEQUENCES OF BLENDING THOSE
TOGETHER IN THE GRADE SPAN
ADJUSTMENT. WE PROBABLY NEED TO
SEPARATE TK. WE CAN USE THE SAME
RATES, BUT SEPARATE TK. OUT OF
THAT CALCULATION SO THAT WE
DON'T HAVE UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES ON STAFFING IN K
THROUGH THREE. THANK YOU.
SPECIFICITY. AND ALSO THE
TESTIMONY. APPRECIATE THAT. MISS
HARDIMAN. GREAT. THANK YOU
AGAIN, KATY HARMON WITH THE
CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION.
AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE BELIEVE
THE OVERALL FUNDING FOR THE LCFF
IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO ACHIEVE THE
GOALS OF ADEQUACY AND EQUITY.
CTA HAS LONG SUPPORTED EFFORTS
TO INCREASE THE OVERALL TARGET
BASE RATES FOR THE LCFF, AND IN
TURN, THAT INCREASES THE
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANT FUNDING AS WELL, LIFTING
UP KIND OF ALL COMPONENTS OF THE
FORMULA. OVERALL, YOU KNOW, THE
FUNDING IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO
MEET BASIC NEEDS. SOME OF THESE
INCLUDE ADDRESSING THE TEACHER
SHORTAGE, AS WE MENTIONED
EARLIER, INCREASED SALARIES.
LOWER CLASS SIZES WILL HELP
ENSURE STUDENTS HAVE A HIGH
QUALITY TEACHER, WHICH WE KNOW
IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT IN OUR
LOW PERFORMING SCHOOLS, WHICH IS
WHY WE SEE KIND OF THAT DISTRICT
WIDE APPROACH SOMETIMES,
ESPECIALLY IN HIGH CONCENTRATION
POVERTY DISTRICTS, AND THEN ALSO
INCREASING THE NUMBER OF MENTAL
HEALTH PROFESSIONALS,
COUNSELORS, NURSES, SUPPORT
STAFF IN OUR SCHOOLS AND
ADDRESSING THIS GROWING
RESPONSIBILITY OF SCHOOLS TO
KIND OF ADDRESS THE WHOLE CHILD.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND
WELCOME DISCUSSION AROUND THE
VARIOUS COMPONENTS OF THE
FORMULA. AS MENTIONED, YOU KNOW,
AGREED, THE REGIONAL COST
DIFFERENCES MATTER. WE OFTEN
HEAR FROM OUR MEMBERS THAT THEY
ARE UNABLE TO AFFORD TO LIVE IN
THE PLACES THAT THEY TEACH
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, STUDENTS
RECEIVE THE SAME ADA REGARDLESS
OF WHERE IN THE STATE THEY LIVE.
SO THAT'S CERTAINLY A VALID
POLICY CONSIDERATION. ALSO,
SPECIAL EDUCATION DON'T WANT TO
KIND OF REPEAT EVERYTHING, BUT
THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, KEPT
SEPARATE FROM THE LCFF. THESE
STUDENTS CONTINUED TO BE KIND OF
THE LOWEST PERFORMING AND SILOED
IN OUR ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM.
SO, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERATION FOR
THAT. AND THEN WE'VE HEARD
OFTENTIMES THIS SORT OF
CONCENTRATION GRANT CLIFF
EFFECT. WE'VE YOU KNOW, I KNOW
YOU'RE DISCUSSING CONCENTRATION
GRANT LATER ON, BUT WE'VE HEARD
FROM OUR LOCALS ABOUT DISTRICTS
SORT OF TEETERING IN AND OUT OF
CONCENTRATION GRANT STATUS,
WHICH CREATES INSTABILITY FOR
THEIR THEIR BUDGET. AND THEN
FINALLY THE GRADE SPAN
ADJUSTMENT. YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE
THE GRADE SPAN ADJUSTMENT IS
JUST NOT SUFFICIENT TO FULLY
FUND THOSE LOWER CLASS SIZES FOR
THOSE LOWER GRADES, AND
THEREFORE, THAT'S OFTEN
NEGOTIATED AWAY AT THE
BARGAINING TABLE, BECAUSE THE
STATUTE ALLOWS FOR THAT. AND THE
FUNDING IS JUST NOT SUFFICIENT
TO COVER THAT. SO ESSENTIALLY,
THE GRADE SPAN ADJUSTMENT IN
MOST CASES IS NOT ACHIEVING SORT
OF THE POLICY GOAL OF LOWERING
CLASS SIZES. SO ULTIMATELY, ANY
CHANGES TO THE FORMULA WILL
LIKELY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES. AND SO THAT HAS
DISTRIBUTIONAL IMPACTS. AND SO
WE WANT ANY POLICY DISCUSSION TO
BE, YOU KNOW, THOROUGHLY VETTED
ON ALL OF THESE COMPONENTS. SO
I'LL LEAVE IT THERE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE
THAT. DOCTOR TIM STOWE, TORRANCE
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
WELCOME. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR
ALVAREZ AND MURATSUCHI AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AND
STAFF. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND GIVE
YOU A PERSPECTIVE FROM THE LOCAL
LEVEL OF THE LCFF AS INTRODUCED.
I'M TIM STOWE, FIFTH YEAR AS
SUPERINTENDENT IN TORRANCE. WE
ARE A DISTRICT OF 22,000
STUDENTS ABOUT 20 MILES
SOUTHWEST OF LOS ANGELES. WE ARE
ONE OF THE MOST DIVERSE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. IF YOU LOOK US UP.
SO BY WAY OF BACKGROUND, I ALSO
WAS THE CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICER
IN 2013. AND WHEN THE DISTRICT
HELPED FORM THE CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL FUNDING COALITION THAT
ADVOCATES CONTINUOUSLY FOR
INCREASE IN BASE FUNDING THROUGH
THOSE EARLY EFFORTS AND
COLLABORATING WITH LEGISLATORS,
WE ACTUALLY WERE ABLE TO
SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE
ACCOUNT FOR OR SIGNIFICANTLY
INCREASE THE BASE GRANT, WHICH
ACCOUNTED FOR PRE LCFF
CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS THAT HELPED
ALL STUDENTS. SO TORRANCE HAS AN
UNDUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE OF
38%, MAKING US MOSTLY RELIANT ON
BASE GRANT FUNDING IN SOME
YEARS. THE GROWTH IN THE BASE
GRANT KEEPS UP WITH THE COST OF
EDUCATING OUR STUDENTS, AS IT
DID IN 2023, 22, 23, WHEN THE
STATE WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND IN
PROVIDING FUNDS ABOVE THE COLA.
HOWEVER, IN YEARS LIKE THE ONE
WE'RE IN, THE 1.07% COLA
TRANSLATES TO A. -0.37 COLA FOR
WHAT WE CALL THE TORRANCE FUNDED
COLA. AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ENROLLMENT
CHANGES, EMPLOYEE STEP AND
COLUMN INCREASES THAT YOU'VE
HEARD ABOUT STRS AND PERS
INCREASES, AND RISING UTILITY
AND INSURANCE COSTS. THIS DOES
NOT REFLECT THE CONSISTENT
INCREASES IN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM
THE GENERAL FUND TO SUPPORT
PROGRAMS FOR STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES, AS SPECIAL
EDUCATION FUNDING HAS NOT KEPT
PACE WITH INCREASED STUDENT
NEEDS. AND FOR TORRANCE, IT'S
ROUGHLY $50 MILLION EVERY YEAR
THAT'S CONTRIBUTED TO OUR
SPECIAL ED LINE OUT OF THE
GENERAL FUND. AS AN ASIDE, WE
ARE NOT A DISTRICT THAT IS
SEVERELY DECLINING IN
ENROLLMENT. AND SO IF WE WERE
THAT NEGATIVE, TUSD COLA WOULD
BE EVEN GREATER. SO WITHOUT
SIGNIFICANT SUPPLEMENTAL OR ANY
CONCENTRATION FUNDING WE HAVE,
WE FACE A SET OF CHALLENGES,
INCLUDING COMPETING WITH OUR
BETTER FUNDED DISTRICTS FOR
RETAINING AND RECRUITING
EXPERIENCED EDUCATORS FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE, THE BASE GRANT
MERITS AN ANNUAL STEADY INCREASE
TO MEET THE NEEDS OF ALL
STUDENTS. WE THINK THERE'S VALUE
IN SETTING A NEW ASPIRATIONAL
TARGET TO RECOGNIZE THE
CHALLENGES FACING EDUCATION
TODAY AND INTO THE FUTURE. SO AS
WE THINK ABOUT LCFF 2.0, WE
REMEMBER THE GREAT INVESTMENTS
THAT WERE MADE IN THE EARLY DAYS
AND 2000, 13 THROUGH 2019, WHEN
IT BECAME FULLY FUNDED. AND
WHILE THERE WERE CHALLENGES IN
IMPLEMENTATION, INCLUDING
UNKNOWING FROM YEAR TO YEAR, HOW
MUCH WE WERE GOING TO GET, WE DO
RECOGNIZE THAT THE FUNDS FLOWING
INTO LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS WERE
AT HISTORIC LEVELS. AND SO THANK
YOU. AND IF IN THE NEAR FUTURE,
THE LEGISLATURE IS FORTUNATE
ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO BE
CONSIDERING HOW THE NEW
RESOURCES MIGHT BE USED, PLEASE
KNOW THIS WE DO NOT NEED MORE
CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS. WHAT WE DO
NEED ARE ADEQUATE RESOURCES TO
ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF ALL
STUDENTS, NEEDS THAT ARE FAR
MORE COMPLEX THAN THEY WERE WHEN
THE LCFF WAS ADOPTED. FOR YEARS,
WE'VE HYPOTHETICALLY THOUGHT
ABOUT AND STRUGGLED WITH WHAT
LEAS WOULD DO WITH MORE ADEQUATE
FUNDING. PHÐ. SO FOR THIS BRIEF
PERIOD IN COVID AND POST COVID
TIMES, WE'VE HAD MORE FUNDING TO
BE ABLE TO THINK ABOUT. SO I'M
GOING TO SHARE SOME IDEAS WITH
YOU ABOUT HOW YOU CAN UNDERSTAND
THE SITUATION IN TORRANCE A
LITTLE BIT BETTER. WE'VE BEEN
VERY THOUGHTFUL AND JUDICIOUS
WITH THE USE OF ONE TIME
DOLLARS, NOT EXPENDING THOSE IN
IN 1 OR 2 YEARS, BUT REALLY
TAKING A LONG TERM VIEW OF WHAT
CAN WE PUT IN PLACE THAT WE
ALWAYS WANTED TO BUT COULDN'T.
SO UTILIZING ONE TIME DOLLARS
FROM AB 86 ESSER LEARNING
RECOVERY BLOCK GRANT AND
EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS TO NAME
SOME, WE PUT PROGRAMS IN PLACE
THAT WE COULDN'T PAY FOR OUT OF
BASE GRANT FUNDING. WE NOW HAVE,
FOR THE FIRST TIME, FULL TIME
COUNSELORS AT EACH ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL. WE HAVE FULL TIME MENTAL
HEALTH MENTAL HEALTH THERAPISTS
AT EACH OF OUR MIDDLE AND HIGH
SCHOOLS. WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED AND
PROVIDED ABOVE THE SUPPLEMENTAL
FUNDING. ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE
SCHOOL INTERVENTION TEACHERS. WE
HAVE EXTENDED DAY TUTORING,
ACCELERATED LEARNING
OPPORTUNITIES, AND CREDIT
RECOVERY. SUMMER ENGAGEMENT AND
ENRICHMENT, PROFESSIONAL
LEARNING FOR OUR TEACHERS AND
EVEN OUR CLASSIFIED STAFF. AND
OF COURSE, THE ONGOING COSTS OF
TEXTBOOKS AND INSTRUCTIONAL
MATERIALS. SO I'LL ASK YOU TO
CONCLUDE, PLEASE. SO ALL OF
THESE THINGS I JUST MENTIONED
ARE OVER $10 MILLION ANNUALLY
AND MORE THAN 3% OF OUR BUDGET,
AND THEY WILL RUN OUT IN 2027.
SO WE HAVE SOME, YOU KNOW, SOME
THINKING TO DO BETWEEN NOW AND
THEN REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THAT THESE PROGRAMS HELP ALL
STUDENTS, AND WE HAVE EVIDENCE
TO SHOW THAT IT'S WORKING AND
ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO CONTINUE
TO SUPPORT THAT CONVERSATION
AROUND ADDITIONAL BASE GRANT
FUNDING. I'M HAPPY TO BE ABLE TO
BE A PART OF THANK YOU. THANK
YOU FOR BEING HERE AND SHARING
THAT FROM THE SHASTA COUNTY
OFFICE OF EDUCATION. WE HAVE
MIKE FREEMAN. WELCOME. GOOD
MORNING, EVERYONE. I AM HONORED
TO BE HERE REPRESENTING SHASTA
COUNTY AND HAVING A PART OF THIS
CONVERSATION. I WANT TO
INTRODUCE YOU A LITTLE BIT TO
SHASTA COUNTY DOCTOR. DOCTOR TIM
STOWE HERE HAS ALMOST AS MANY
STUDENTS IN HIS DISTRICT AS WE
HAVE IN OUR ENTIRE COUNTY. WE
HAVE 26,000 STUDENTS IN SHASTA
COUNTY, 24 DISTRICTS, INCLUDING
OUR OWN STUDENT PROGRAMS AND
COUNTY OFFICE. SO 25 DISTRICTS,
15 CHARTERS. WE'RE ALSO IN THE
EARLY CHILDHOOD BUSINESS. SO
THAT'S ANOTHER 10,000. SO WE'LL
SAY 37,000 YOUNG PEOPLE IN
SHASTA COUNTY. AND THEY MATTER
AND CONTEXT MATTERS. AND LOCAL
CONTROL MATTERS IN THIS
DISCUSSION MATTERS. SO WE I
REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE TIME
YOU'RE GIVING US, AND I
APPRECIATE THE INPUT FROM MY
FELLOW PANELISTS AND FROM THE
PREVIOUS PANEL. AND I AGREE THAT
I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
CONVERSATION AS WE HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THOSE THOSE
TWO TOGETHER AS WE AS WE THINK
ABOUT. AS, AS WE THINK ABOUT
ADEQUATE. WELL, AS I THINK ABOUT
THE BASE GRANT, IT IS DIFFICULT
TO NOT ADDRESS ADEQUACY. I
BELIEVE CALIFORNIA IS THE FIFTH
LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD.
AND HOW COULD WE BE IN THE LOWER
PERCENTILES OF STATE FUNDING?
WHEN I FEEL THE
DISPROPORTIONALITY IN WHAT THIS
ECONOMY MEANS TO THIS COUNTRY
AND WHAT MAYBE EDUCATION MIGHT
MEAN TO THIS STATE. SO I DO
APPRECIATE THE HISTORIC
INCREASES. AND I WOULD SAY THAT
THAT IS THE FLOOR, AND I
APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION AND
THE ANALOGY ABOUT ABOUT THE
REMODEL. WE HAVE FREE AND
REDUCED AND THE APPLICATION, THE
IN CALIFORNIA, LUNCH IS FREE.
AND SO WE'RE STILL ASKING
DISTRICTS TO GET THE APPLICATION
DONE SO THAT WE CAN GET THE
UNDUPLICATED COUNT ACCURATE. AND
SO WE'RE WE'RE IN THIS
INTERESTING, INTERESTING SPOT.
AND IF I ME IN FIVE MINUTES
DON'T, DON'T REALLY GET ALONG.
SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO KEEP THIS
SHORT. BUT I'LL JUST MAKE AN
ANALOGY FROM THE INSTRUCTIONAL
SIDE OF THINGS. WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT MULTIPLE TIERS OF
SYSTEMATIC SUPPORT IN OUR
CLASSROOMS, IF I HAVE TIER ONE
GENERAL LEVEL FIRST INSTRUCTION
PROBLEMS, I CAN'T INTERVENTION
MY WAY OUT OF THOSE PROBLEMS.
AND I WOULD JUST MAKE THAT
ANALOGY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
LCFF AND THE FUNDING FORMULA, IT
HAS BEEN TRANSFORMATIONAL. WE
CANNOT SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION OUR WAY OUT OF
BASE GRANT PROBLEMS. SO IF I
COULD IF I COULD JUST EMPHASIZE,
EMPHASIZE THAT THIS IS NOT EASY.
I'VE MADE A PICTURE. I'VE KIND
OF PAINTED A PICTURE OF WHAT
SHASTA COUNTY LOOKS LIKE.
CALIFORNIA IS VAST AND VARIED,
AND THAT CONTEXT THAT LOCAL
CONTROL DOES MATTER. BASE
ADEQUACY ALLOWS SUPERINTENDENTS,
ALLOWS DISTRICTS TO ADDRESS
TODAY'S CHALLENGES TODAY AND
CHALLENGES ARE CONTINUALLY
CHANGING. THE CHALLENGES THAT
ARE CONFRONTING OUR SCHOOLS
RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW, I'M
GRATEFUL FOR LOCAL CONTROL
BECAUSE SOME OF OUR DISTRICTS
HAVE CHOSEN TO USE SOME OF THOSE
FUNDS FOR GENERATORS THAT THEY
ARE ABOUT TO TURN ON, BECAUSE
WE'RE FACING A POWER SHUT OFF
PROTOCOL THAT STARTED UP IN OUR
AREA AT 1130. RIGHT. SO LIKE,
THAT'S JUST THAT'S A NEW REALITY
THAT MAYBE IN 2012 WASN'T A
REALITY. SO AS WE THINK ABOUT,
NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN THIS,
IN THIS STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
IT'S BEEN TOUCHED ON ALREADY.
BUT 80 TO PROBABLY 85% IN SOME
PLACES OF THE MONEY IS GOING TO
PEOPLE. AND WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
PEOPLE BY ADDRESSING BASE, BY
HAVING THIS CONVERSATION AND
REMODELING, GIVING US ADDITIONAL
TARGETS TO INCREASE THAT BASE,
IT'S GOING TO EMPOWER OUR
DISTRICTS TO CHAMPION PUBLIC
EDUCATION AND RECRUIT BECAUSE WE
NEED TO RECRUIT THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT WERE WORKING IN
TARGET YESTERDAY AND ARE
TEACHING 25 KIDS TODAY HAS
INCREASED, AND I THINK THAT
THEY'VE GOT 15 MINUTES OF
EXPERIENCE. AND THAT KID IN
FRONT OF THEM IS A DIFFERENT KID
AND IT'S CHALLENGING. AND I, I
KNOW THAT WE'RE POST-PANDEMIC,
BUT MUCH LIKE WHAT WE'VE SEEN
WITH HURRICANE MILTON, LIKE
AFTER THE STORM IS THE PICKUP
AND WE'RE IN THIS PROCESS OF
CLEANUP AND THERE'S SOME SERIOUS
CLEANUP THAT IS STILL NEEDED.
EVERYTHING ABOUT LCFF,
EVERYTHING ABOUT THE LOCAL
CONTROL, ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN IS
NEEDS DRIVEN. OUR NEEDS NEED TO
BE DRIVING THIS PROCESS AND OUR
POST-PANDEMIC NEEDS ARE A
REALITY. WE'VE ALL GONE THROUGH
THE SAME STORM, BUT WE HAVE BEEN
IN DIFFERENT BOATS, AND I THINK
THAT THE CHALLENGES THAT ARE
BEING IN FRONT OF PEOPLE ARE
TAKING RESOURCES THAT WE WOULD
LOVE TO PUT IN THE CLASSROOMS.
BUT IN ORDER TO REMOVE BARRIERS
AND HELP LEARNING HAPPEN IN THE
CLASSROOMS, WE'RE HAVING TO ADD
SOME OF THE SOME OF THE
RESOURCES THAT OUR KIDS NEED IN
SHASTA COUNTY. WE HAVE WE HAVE A
DIVERSITY. IT LOOKS A LITTLE
DIFFERENT, RIGHT? WE HAVE
ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES.
WE HAVE WE LEAD WE LEAD THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN THINGS
LIKE PREMATURE DEATH. THOSE ARE
REALITIES THAT THOSE KIDS ARE
BEING DROPPED OFF IN. SCHOOLS
AND DISTRICTS NEED TO BE
EMPOWERED BY THE LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA IN ORDER TO DO
THIS. I'M JUST GOING TO QUOTE
BILL PARCELLS. IF YOU'RE GOING
TO ASK US TO COOK DINNER, LET US
BUY THE GROCERIES. RIGHT. SO
THAT BASE GRANT GIVES US THE
CONTROL THAT WE NEED TO BE ABLE
TO DO THE THINGS THAT OUR KIDS
NEED. THANK YOU. AND YOU DIDN'T
YOU, IN FIVE MINUTES DON'T GET
ALONG. BUT YOU DID QUITE WELL.
OKAY, THAT WAS FIVE MINUTES. SO
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO ASK THAT
THE MEMBERS OF PANEL ONE STEP
FORWARD AND I'M GOING TO ASK A
FEW FOLKS TO TAKE A SEAT UP
HERE. WE'LL HAVE MIKE FINE WITH
THAT. PLEASE JOIN US UP UP HERE.
AND BROOKS ALLEN WITH THE BOARD
OF EDUCATION. IF YOU COULD JOIN
DOWN HERE. WE ALSO HAVE THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST OFFICE
THAT'S PRESENT. WE'VE GOT A
COUPLE OF FOLKS FROM FROM THAT
OFFICE AVAILABLE. AND YEAH, ALL
THE ALL THE OTHER PANELISTS WHO
WERE ON THE SECOND PANEL, PLEASE
STAY BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS HERE TO. WE
HAVE AARON HEREDIA WITH CDE,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HERE,
MICHAEL ALVAREZ WITH THE LA Þ,
AND ALSO EDGAR CABRAL WITH THE
LA Ó AVAILABLE FOR ALL OF US
FOR QUESTIONS. SO THANK YOU. YOU
KNOW, THIS IS ANALOGOUS WHAT
WE'RE DOING NOW TO THE
CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING TODAY.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SURE AMONG
THE CONFINES OF WHAT WE HAVE TO
WORK WITH, THAT WE CAN MAKE MAKE
THIS WORK WELL. SO I APPRECIATE
YOU ALL BEING SO FLEXIBLE WITH
THAT. I WANT TO START OFF WITH A
FEW QUESTIONS, HOPEFULLY GET THE
DISCUSSION GOING, AND THEN TURN
IT OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES. LET ME
LET ME START WITH ACKNOWLEDGING
AND MAYBE THANKING AND PERHAPS
APOLOGIZING FOR STEALING THE
DOCTOR. JOHNSON'S EXAMPLE OF
WHAT WE'RE DOING, I THINK I
THINK IT WAS REALLY WELL SAID IN
TERMS OF REMODELING AND I WAS
JUST THINKING, OKAY, HOW CAN I
HOW CAN I TRY TO EXPAND THAT
REALLY GREAT METAPHOR? I GUESS
PREVIOUSLY, PREVIOUS LCFF WE HAD
A REALLY OLD HOUSE WITH A BAD
FOUNDATION WITH BAD ELECTRICAL
WORK, MAYBE, MAYBE ADDITIONS
THAT WEREN'T PERMITTED AND IT
JUST WASN'T A HOUSE THAT WE
COULD LIVE IN. SO WE REBUILT IS
WHAT I GATHERED FROM YOU AND
FROM OTHERS RIGHT LCFF WE
REBUILT AND STRONGER FOUNDATION
WITH A LOT OF KEY PIECES IN
PLACE, BUT PERHAPS NOW, AS SOME
OF SOMEBODY ELSE SAID, YOU KNOW,
WE NEED TO DO THINGS LIKE TK IS
NOW A NEW YOU HAD A BABY, SO YOU
GOT TO ADD A KID ROOM AND THAT'S
A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ROOM. AND
BUT IT'S PART OF THE WHOLE HOUSE
AND IT NEEDS TO FIT IN WELL. AND
SO APPRECIATE THAT THAT METAPHOR.
IT'S BEEN REALLY, REALLY HELPFUL
TO THINK THROUGH EVERYBODY'S
COMMENTS. I ALSO WANT TO
RECOGNIZE MISS MISS GABEL, MISS
REESE, WHO SET UP THE
CONVERSATION TODAY. AND I KNOW
FOLKS FELT LIKE THEY WERE
GETTING CUT OFF, BUT THE INTENT
WAS TO BUILD UPON EACH OTHER SO
WE COULD HAVE A CONVERSATION
THAT THAT INCREASED. EVERYBODY
HAD ADDITIONAL VALUE TO THE
CONVERSATION, TO OUR QUESTIONS.
SO I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR
THEIR THOUGHTFULNESS. THIS IN
THIS AND YOUR FLEXIBILITY AND
UNDERSTANDING AS WE TRY TO MOVE
THROUGH THE AGENDA. BUT DOCTOR
JOHNSON, WHICH IS WHO I SAID I
WAS GONNA START WITH, AND THIS
WAS MENTIONED AGAIN, WHY WE HAD
THE TWO PANELS AMONG THE TWO
PANELS ON THE REGIONAL COST
ADJUSTMENTS ON LCFF, DOCTOR
KIRSCH SAID IT WE HAD, I THINK
MISTER PHªN SAID IT. I THINK
MISTER LEVIN SAID IT. WE HAD WE
HEARD IT TIME AND TIME AGAIN.
CAN YOU CAN YOU JUST MY QUESTION
IS, IS WHAT IS YOUR PROPOSAL ON
HOW WE WANT TO GET TO THE HOW
ALL OF YOU WHO PRESENTED IDEAS
AND PROPOSALS, HOW COULD WE DO
THAT? AND OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NOT
GOING TO FIGURE IT OUT TODAY.
BUT GIVE ME SOME SOME THINKING
THAT YOU HAD ON HOW WE FIX THAT.
I CERTAINLY DEFER TO OTHERS THAT
CAN WEIGH IN. CERTAINLY THERE'S
MANY HERE THAT CAN DO THAT. BUT
I THINK THE ONE THING THAT I
WOULD JUST CENTER IS THAT
INSTRUCTION CENTERED INVESTMENTS
MATTER. THE MOST FOR STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS. AND
THAT MEANS THAT HOW WE HIRE
TEACHERS AND THE TEACHER SALARY
STRUCTURE THAT ENABLES IT TO BE
MOST COMPETITIVE IS SOMETHING
THAT WE CAN'T BE SILENT ON. AND
CURRENTLY THE FORMULA IS SILENT
ON IT, WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE
IN 2013. I DON'T THINK IT'S
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN AFFORD TO
BE SILENT ON NOW GOING FORWARD.
THERE ARE IN LABOR ECONOMICS,
THERE'S WHAT'S CALLED THE
COMPARABLE WAGE INDEX THAT TRIES
TO CREATE WHAT IS THE
COMPETITIVE SALARIES IN
PARTICULAR OCCUPATION SECTORS
AND REGIONS THAT ADJUST, LIKE IN
THE SAME WAY THAT WE HAVE A CPI,
YOU KNOW, INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.
RIGHT. FOR PUT THINGS IN REAL
DOLLARS. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT THE FUNDING ENABLES THE
PURCHASING POWER OF THAT FUNDING
TO PURCHASE THE SAME INPUT AS MY
ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE AT R IS
RIGHT. EMPHASIZING. RIGHT. SO I
WILL DEFER TO JESSE BECAUSE HE'S
DONE A LOT OF THE WORK ON HOW WE
OPERATIONALIZE THAT. BUT LET ME
JUST SAY THERE'S SCIENCE TO
THAT. THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE
POLITICIZED OR MAKE INTO LIKE,
LOSERS AND WINNERS. WE'RE TRYING
TO BUILD A SYSTEM THAT THAT'S A
GREAT POINT FOR ALL, BECAUSE IN
FACT, I WAS GOING TO ASK THAT
QUESTION OF MR. LEVIN BECAUSE I
READ YOUR REPORT FROM NOW, I
KNOW IT'S A COUPLE YEARS OLD,
2018 THAT WAS ON GETTING DOWN TO
FACTS TECHNICAL REPORT. AND YOU
DO POINT OUT IN THIS REPORT
ANYWAY, I HAPPEN TO REPRESENT AN
URBAN AREA, BUT I TRY, AT LEAST
IN THIS ROLE, TO BE MINDFUL OF
STUDENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA AND MY COLLEAGUES WHO
REPRESENT OTHER DISTRICTS AND
YOU IN THIS REPORT TALK ABOUT
RURAL AREAS ALSO BEING
DEFICIENT. NOW, I CAN'T FIND THE
NOTE, BUT I KNOW YOU MENTIONED
IT SPECIFICALLY, BUT YOU ALSO
ARE AN ADVOCATE OR AT LEAST
MENTIONED THE CONCEPT OF THE
DIFFERENTIAL PAY FOR REGION. SO
I WANT TO ASK YOU HOW YOU BRING
THOSE TWO TOGETHER, GIVEN THAT
YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THAT AS A
CONFLICT. SO THANK YOU. SO MUCH
FOR THE QUESTION. THIS IS A
GREAT EXAMPLE OF HOW DIFFERENT
COST FACTORS ALL HAVE TO BE
TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. IT'S ALL
INTERTWINED. SO YOU HAVE THIS
TENSION WHERE URBAN AREAS TEND
TO BE MORE COSTLY TO HIRE. AND
RETAIN STAFF THAN RURAL AREAS.
HOWEVER, THAT CAN BE OFFSET BY
THE DISECONOMIES OF SCALE OF
OPERATING IN A RURAL AREA IN
SUCH A SMALL SCALE. SO WE WOULD
NEVER I. IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE
I WROTE THAT, BUT I'M PRETTY
SURE THE POINT THAT WE MADE IS
THAT IS THAT YOU WANT TO BE ABLE
TO CONTROL FOR BOTH OF THESE
COST FACTORS, THE DISECONOMIES
OF SCALE, RIGHT? RIGHT. NOW YOU
HAVE THIS, THIS SMALL SCHOOL
ADJUSTMENT, RIGHT? YOU DO NOT
HAVE THIS ADJUSTMENT FOR THE
PRICE LEVEL OF EDUCATIONAL
INPUTS. SO I WOULD ARGUE THAT
YOU REALLY NEED BOTH OF THOSE.
THE COMPARABLE WAGE INDEX IS LOW
HANGING FRUIT. THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT IS PART OF THE NATIONAL
CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS.
IT'S A PRODUCT OF THEIRS. IT WAS
DEVELOPED BY A BRILLIANT
ECONOMIST, LORI TAYLOR, AT AT
TEXAS, TEXAS A&M AND COAUTHOR
COLLEAGUE. SO IT'S VERY EASY TO
IMPLEMENT. IT'S AN INDEX VALUE
THAT'S CENTERED AROUND ONE. SO
IF IT'S 1.1 IT COSTS 10% MORE TO
HIRE AND RETAIN STAFF. IF IT'S
90%, IT COSTS 10% LESS. I GAVE
YOU JUST TWO EXAMPLES THAT WERE
EMPIRICAL OF BELLEVUE AND OF SAN
FRANCISCO. IN 2021. THERE WAS A
STARK DIFFERENCE, RIGHT NOW.
LCFF IS NOT IS NOT IS NOT
APPROPRIATELY FUNDING ACCORDING
TO THAT IMPORTANT COST FACTOR.
AND MORE GENERALLY, I WANT
EVERYBODY TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER
ALL OF THE COST FACTORS THAT WE
HAVE IN PLACE, WHETHER ALL THE
COST FACTORS THAT WE THINK
SHOULD BE IN PLACE ARE IN PLACE,
AND THE ONES THAT WE DO HAVE IN
PLACE, ARE THEY ACCURATE? THOSE
ARE MY TWO MAIN POINTS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, DOCTOR JOHNSON,
I HAD A QUESTION ON THE YOU HAVE
I APPRECIATE YOUR ALMOST LAST
SLIDE. WELL THE LAST SLIDE WAS
GREAT TOO. ON THE AUTONOMY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY BALANCE. RIGHT.
BUT THE PRIOR THE ONE BEFORE
THAT ON, YOU'VE IDENTIFIED THREE
VERY SPECIFIC THINGS ON THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT CURRENTLY
LACKING PROGRESSIVITY POINT THAT
YOU MAKE THE LA Ó HAS A REPORT
THAT WE THEY PUT OUT IN JANUARY
OF 2023 ON Ã. AND I'M SORRY I
DIDN'T GIVE THIS AHEAD TO THE LA
TEAM, BUT THEY PROBABLY THEY
KNOW THIS SO WELL. THEY PROBABLY
REMEMBER THERE IS SUPPLEMENTAL
AND CONCENTRATION GRANT INCREASE
BY QUARTILE OF LOW INCOME
STUDENTS. AND SO THERE IS SOME
GROWTH. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT
THE GROWTH NEEDS TO BE MORE
PROGRESSIVE, MORE AGGRESSIVE,
MAYBE TIERED DIFFERENTLY AS
OPPOSED TO BY QUARTILE? WHAT DO
YOU MEAN BY THIS PARTICULAR
POINT THAT YOU HAVE? I THINK
THAT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THE
FUNDING FORMULA AND THE IMPACT
IT'S HAD, I THINK OF COMPARING
THE PRE LCFF FORMULA WITH THE
POST LCFF FORMULA THAT APPLIED
FOR EVERY SCHOOL, EVERY DISTRICT
ACROSS THE STATE FOR MULTIPLE
YEARS. SO WE DO THAT. YOU APPLY
THE FUNDING FORMULA FOR EACH
YEAR IN THE YEARS LEADING UP TO
AND IN THE YEARS THAT THE LCFF
IS BEING ROLLED OUT. AND THE
REASON THAT'S IMPORTANT IS
BECAUSE THE LCFF DID REMOVE
THINGS WHILE REPLACING IT WITH A
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANT. IF YOU JUST LOOK AT THE
SUPPLEMENTAL CONCENTRATION GRANT
BUT DON'T ACCOUNT FOR WHAT IT
REMOVED, LIKE THE ECONOMIC
IMPACT AID, THEN YOU START TO
REALIZE THAT THE CHANGE TO THE
LCFF SYSTEM LEFT THE
PROGRESSIVITY OF THE FUNDING
FORMULA KIND OF UNADDRESSED IN
THE 0 TO 55% RANGE, MEANING THE
OVERALL INCREASE IN THE SPENDING
OVERALL DID GET RAISED. BUT LIKE
IF YOU'RE A 20% DISTRICT,
DISADVANTAGED UNDUPLICATED
VERSUS 45%, YOU'RE EXPERIENCING
MUCH GREATER NEED, BUT YOU'RE
NOT GETTING NO MORE. SORRY.
YOU'RE NOT GETTING ANY MORE
FUNDING THROUGH THE LCFF SYSTEM.
I'M SAYING THAT COULD BE
IMPROVED BY CHANGING OR
RETHINKING THE WEIGHTS. GOT IT.
THAT'S VERY SPECIFIC. THANK YOU.
DO YOU ALSO HAVE THIS COULD BE A
QUICK ANSWER. DATA SETS THAT
SHOW THAT SOME OF THOSE SCHOOLS
IN THE 20% RANGE OR LOWER WERE
PREVIOUSLY RECEIVING MORE
FUNDING. DO YOU HAVE DATA SET
THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT? I
WOULDN'T SAY MORE BECAUSE THE
INCREASE OVERALL IN FUNDING DID
INCREASE THE SYSTEM OVERALL, BUT
I WOULD SAY OVER THE COURSE OF
YEARS. BUT I'M WONDERING FROM
IMPLEMENTATION TIME FRAME, I
GUESS THE WAY I THINK OF IT IS
THE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND
SUCCESS OF STUDENTS BEGAN TO BE
IMPROVED LESS QUICKLY FOR THOSE
STUDENTS IN THE 25 TO 50% RANGE.
YEAH, AND YOU HAVE THOSE GRAPHS
AND YOU START SEEING IT BEND
DOWN. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING IT LED
TO LIKE LOSSES, BUT IT LED TO
LESS ACCELERATED IMPROVEMENTS
THAN OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE BEEN.
THE CASE. GREAT. THANK YOU. I
WANT TO ASK DOCTOR CURSED. ARE
YOU STILL ON WITH US, DOCTOR?
CURSED? YES, I AM GREAT. THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR PATIENTLY
WAITING FOR US. I WANT TO FOCUS
ON YOUR COMMENTS ON THE DECISION
TO SEND MONEY TO THE DISTRICTS,
AS OPPOSED TO THE SCHOOLS, AND
YOU SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT
ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS NOT BEING IN
PLACE. AND MAYBE MR. PHªN MIGHT
WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS TOO, BUT
CAN YOU SHARE WITH ME THE
CONCERNS ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC
DECISION? YES. BEFORE I DO, I
JUST WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON
COST OF LIVING. I THINK WE
SHOULD LOOK AT REAL ESTATE
PRICES AS WELL. I'VE BEEN
LOOKING AT THOSE AND THEY VARY A
LOT MORE, I THINK, THAN THE
WAGES. SO I WOULD JUST REAL
ESTATE IS SO IMPORTANT HERE AND
MAY NOT BE AS IMPORTANT
NATIONALLY. YES. IN OUR IN OUR
THINKING, WE WERE OF COURSE VERY
RELUCTANT TO GET INTO IF YOU GO
INTO BALANCE THINGS WITH
SCHOOLS, YOU HAVE TO GO LIKE
TITLE ONE AND COMPUTE THE
WEIGHTS ON THE BASIS OF SCHOOL
SITES. AND THAT CAN BE DONE. BUT
THEN YOU MAY NOT BE YOU'RE JUST
HINDERING THE FLEXIBILITY SO
MUCH THAT AS MANY WITNESSES HAVE
SAID, THEY'VE HAD TO IN EFFECT,
RAID THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION FUNDS TO COVER THE
BASE AND, YOU KNOW, JUST HAVING
THE STATE TIE THE HANDS OF THE
LOCAL DISTRICTS THAT YOU'VE GOT
TO SPEND THIS MUCH ON. EACH
SCHOOL SITE SEEMED TO US TO BE
EXCESSIVE STATE CONTROL AND
PROCEEDING WITH HUMILITY. WE
DIDN'T THINK WE WERE SMART
ENOUGH TO KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.
AND SO THAT, I THINK, WAS THE
AREA ACCOUNTING. I WOULD LIKE
MR. FINE TO COMMENT ON THIS.
NOBODY MUCH BRINGS THIS UP. AS
FAR AS I KNOW. I CAME INTO THIS
BUSINESS IN 1964. THE SCHOOL
ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS NATIONWIDE
HAVEN'T CHANGED SO THAT THINGS
THAT ARE REALLY GOING TO
SCHOOLS, LIKE PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT AND MENTAL HEALTH,
THEY SHOW UP SOMETIMES IN THE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATION BUDGET
AND NOT IN THE SCHOOL BUDGET.
AND SO I AND MOREOVER, SCHOOL
BOARD MEMBERS KEEP SAYING TO ME
THAT WE CAN'T TELL HOW MANY OF
PERSONNEL WE HAVE OF SPECIAL
TYPES, YOU KNOW, LIKE COUNSELORS
FROM LOOKING AT THE SCHOOL
BUDGET. SO YOU KNOW, IT ISN'T A
FINE GRAINED, INFORMATIVE
ACCOUNTING SYSTEM, BUT I HOPE
MOST OF PH¢N CAN. THANK YOU.
YES. MR. FINE. DO YOU HAVE SOME
THOUGHTS ON THAT? THANK YOU,
CHAIR, FOR THE QUESTION. SO I, I
DISAGREE A LITTLE BIT. I HAPPEN
TO BELIEVE THAT THE STANDARDIZED
ACCOUNT CODE STRUCTURE THAT WE
HAVE AVAILABLE TO SCHOOLS IS
VERY, VERY FLEXIBLE AND IF WE
WANT TO DO IT BY SCHOOL SITE, WE
CAN DO IT BY SCHOOL SITE. WE
JUST NEED TO MANDATE THAT THAT'S
HOW WE DO IT. IT IS MUCH EASIER
NOT TO DO THAT. AND SO WE TAKE
THE LEAST BURDENSOME ROUTE HERE,
RIGHT? BUT TO DOCTOR KIRSCH'S
POINT, THERE ARE SERVICES THAT
WE DELIVER TO SCHOOLS, TO KIDS
THAT ARE DISTRICT WIDE, SERVICES
THAT MAY INVOLVE ITINERANT STAFF
THAT WE SHARE EITHER ON A
REGULAR SCHEDULE OR A NOT A
REGULAR SCHEDULE. WITH EACH
SITE, AND SO ON. THAT BREAKING
THAT DOWN ALMOST BY HOUR AT A
SCHOOL SITE IS QUESTIONABLE.
WHETHER THERE'S A VALUE IN DOING
THAT. THERE'S A LOT OF WORK
RIGHT TO DO THAT THAT WE DON'T
DO TODAY. SO THERE'S BUT THERE'S
A BALANCE HERE. BUT THE EXISTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARDIZED
ACCOUNT CODE STRUCTURE, WHICH IS
REFLECTS AN OVERHAUL. I'VE LOST
TRACK OF TIME, BUT A WHILE BACK,
BUT CERTAINLY NOT BACK TO DOCTOR
KIRSCH EXPERIENCE IN AS FAR BACK
AS HE'S NOTED, WOULD PROVIDE
PROVIDES THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO
THIS. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF
SAYING THAT'S WHAT WE WANT DONE.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I HAVE A
QUESTION FOR MR. LAMPERT ON THIS
TERM THAT I REALLY CAUGHT MY
ATTENTION. THE DECLINING
ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND AND
UTILIZATION OF THAT. I, I, YOU
KNOW, I'M BECOMING MORE AND MORE
INFORMED ON OBVIOUSLY SCHOOL
FINANCING JUST IN GENERAL. BUT
AS I MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING
OF MY COMMENTS, THE DATA IS
PRETTY CLEAR. WE HAVE LESS
STUDENTS NOW AND WE HAVE MORE
FUNDING. RIGHT. THAT'S
HAPPENING. AND SO AT SOME POINT,
I BELIEVE GIVEN THE DATA I'VE
SEEN, BUT THERE MIGHT BE NEW
DATA, THAT I COULD BE PROVEN
WRONG. THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO
CROSS TO THE EXTENT TO WHERE
THERE'S GOING TO BE
SIGNIFICANTLY MORE FUNDING PER
ON A PER PUPIL BASIS. IF THAT'S
HOW YOU DO THE CALCULATION, THEN
THERE IS TODAY, WHICH MAYBE THAT
GETS US TO THE ADEQUACY AT SOME
POINT, JUST NOT BECAUSE BY
INTENTION, BUT BECAUSE OF THE
WAY THIS IS HEADED PERHAPS. BUT
AS WE GET TO THAT, I'M
INTERESTED IN THE DECLINING
ENROLLMENT, DIVIDEND AND THE
UTILIZATION OF THAT FOR
SUBGROUPS OR WHAT YOU THINK
SHOULD BE USED. IT SHOULD BE
USED FOR. AND I'M WONDERING WHY
NOT OTHER GROWTH JUST IN 98 TO
BE USED. WHY WHY FOCUSING JUST
ON THAT PARTICULAR DIVIDEND.
MAYBE I THINK I KNOW WHAT THE
ANSWER IS, BUT I LIKE TO HEAR
YOUR THOUGHTS. YEAH. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. I MEAN, MANY FOLKS
HAVE TALKED ABOUT NEEDING THE
BASE INCREASE S AND C INCREASE,
AND YOU HEAR DECLINING
ENROLLMENT Ó. THAT MEANS MORE
DOLLARS. SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT
WE'RE PROPOSING IS PRETTY
STRAIGHTFORWARD, THAT YOU USE
THOSE DECLINING ENROLLMENT
DOLLARS, AS YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE
GOING TO MORE IT'S NOT ALL SIZE
FITS ALL, BUT SOME DISTRICTS
WILL HAVE MORE. AND THAT'S A WAY
TO ADDRESS WHAT'S RIGHT NOW IS
TO A SMALL L LNC AND OVERALL
BASE. BUT I DO JUST WANT TO
EMPHASIZE HEARING ALL THESE
COMMENTS. IT'S LIKE WHAT WAS
LCFF? BECAUSE WHAT I HEAR FROM A
LOT IS, WELL, BUT WE NEED THE
FLEXIBILITY TO FUND THIS AND WE
NEED THESE DISTRICT WIDE NEEDS.
YES, OF COURSE, THAT'S NOT WHAT
LCFF WAS. LCFF WAS STREAMLINING
THE FUNDING, DEALING WITH THE
CATEGORICALS AND AN EQUITY BASED
FORMULA FOR KIDS IN POVERTY
ENGLISH LEARNERS. FORSOOTH, IT
WASN'T ADDRESSING THE OVERALL
AMOUNT. AND SO WE NEED TO KEEP
THAT FOCUS. I MEAN, WE RANKED
NINTH 10TH IN OVERALL TAX BURDEN,
STATE, LOCAL. IF WE WERE NINTH,
10TH IN EDUCATION SPENDING. I
MEAN, THAT'S PRETTY SIMPLE
SOLUTION. LET'S DO THAT. THANK
YOU FOR REMINDING US ABOUT THAT.
I APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK I'LL
JUST ASK A COUPLE MORE AND THEN
TURN IT OVER ON THE ACTUALLY TO
MISS HARDIMAN, YOU MADE A
COMMENT IN THE SECOND PANEL,
WHICH I REALLY LIKE TO HEAR MORE
ABOUT. IS THE TEACHERS A CONCERN
OR THE LACK OF ABILITY OF
TEACHERS IN THE HIGH NEED
SCHOOLS? YOU TALKED ABOUT HOW
SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S
MORE CHALLENGING. I LIKE TO GET
YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW THIS CAN
MAKE WHAT CAN WE DO? AGAIN, THIS
IS ABOUT HOW OR WHAT DO WE NEED
TO DO? HOW CAN WE DO IT SO THAT
WE CAN ALLOW FOR TEACHERS IN
HIGH NEED SCHOOLS THAT SOMETIMES
STRUGGLE WITH MAINTAINING
TEACHERS BECAUSE OF THE
CHALLENGES THEY'RE. YEAH, I
MEAN, I THINK IT COMES DOWN TO
OVERALL FUNDING, RIGHT, FOR
LIFTING UP SALARIES AND CLASS
SIZES AND ALL OF THAT ACROSS OUR
SCHOOLS. BUT I THINK THE POINT I
WAS TRYING TO ADDRESS WAS AROUND
WHEN WE DO HAVE SOMETIMES
DISTRICT WIDE INITIATIVES,
ESPECIALLY IN HIGH CONCENTRATION
DISTRICTS, IT MAY BE TO LOWER
CLASS SIZES FOR THE ENTIRE
DISTRICT BECAUSE THEY HAVE SO
MUCH NEED THROUGHOUT THE
DISTRICT. AND SO THAT IS ONE
THING WE'VE SEEN. THERE IS AN
ABILITY TO KIND OF ADDRESS JUST
YOUR LOWEST PERFORMING OR
HIGHEST NEED SCHOOLS WITHIN THE
DISTRICT. SO THERE'S AN ABILITY
TO DO THAT AND IT DOESN'T
IMPACT, YOU KNOW, THE SALARY
SCHEDULES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
IT'S REALLY JUST STAFFING NEEDS
AND ADDITIONAL STAFF IN THOSE
SCHOOLS. AND WE'VE SEEN THAT
WITH THE INCREASE IN THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT IN RECENT
YEARS, FOCUSING ON THE NUMBER OF
STAFF SUPPORT IN THOSE IN THOSE
SCHOOLS, DOES THE FORMULA ALLOW
FOR SCHOOLS WITHIN THE DISTRICT
WITH HIGHER CONCENTRATION TO
HAVE DIFFERENT STAFFING RATIOS
AND SCHOOLS THAT DON'T, AND
UTILIZING FUNDING TO DO THAT?
AND DO YOU SEE THAT HAPPEN IN A
LOT OF DISTRICTS OR I'VE HEARD
SOME I DON'T KNOW, HAVE A
SPECIFIC NUMBER ON HOW MANY
DISTRICTS DO THAT, BUT I HAVE
HEARD SOME CASES THAT ARE
HAPPENING AND I'M INTERESTED IN
THAT. AND CERTAINLY THOSE OF YOU
WHO WORK WITH DISTRICTS, I'D
LIKE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THAT. I
DON'T I HAVE MORE, BUT I WANT TO
TURN IT OVER NOW TO MY
COLLEAGUES TO ASK SOME
QUESTIONS. SO WE'LL GO WITH MR.
MURATSUCHI. THANK YOU. I. WANTED
TO PICK UP ON, YOU KNOW, SINCE
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT ARE THE
IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE CAN MAKE ON
ON LCFF, I WANTED TO FOCUS ON
PROFESSOR JOHNSON'S LIST OF THE
MOST EFFECTIVE EXPENDITURES
USING CONCENTRATION AND
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS. AND I
WANTED TO SEE IF, DOCTOR KIRST,
AS AS YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE
ORIGINAL ARCHITECTS OF THE LOCAL
CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA, TO SEE
IF HE WOULD AGREE, IF THESE WAYS
OF SPENDING, THE CONCENTRATION
AND SUPPLEMENTAL DOLLARS ARE
THESE THE MOST EFFECTIVE TO, YOU
KNOW, ACHIEVE THE EQUITY GOALS
OF LCFF ADDRESSING CLASS SIZE,
ADDRESSING TEACHER SALARIES,
TEACHER TURNOVER, GUIDANCE
COUNSELORS, HEALTH SERVICES AND
TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT.
DOCTOR KIRST ONLINE. YEAH, I
THINK THAT'S A HARD QUESTION TO
ANSWER BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON THE
LOCAL CONTEXT. AND SO HOW WHAT
THEIR PARTICULAR NEEDS ARE MAY
MAY JUSTIFY THAT. I DO THINK
THAT ALLOCATING FUNDS TO
IMPROVING INSTRUCTION IS OFTEN
AND DIRECTLY DOING THAT, RATHER
THAN INDIRECTLY THROUGH PENSIONS
OR SOMETHING IS REALLY MUCH MORE
EFFECTIVE IN RAISING THE
ATTAINMENT OF OUR STUDENTS. SO
AND DOCTOR JOHNSON RAISED THAT
TOO. SO I THINK THAT'S THE AREA
THERE. BUT I YOU KNOW IT. I
DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT.
AND THAT'S WHY I DEFER TO A
LOCAL CONTEXT. IT VARIES. SO
MUCH. BUT BUT IF I CAN JUST
FOLLOW UP BEFORE MAYBE ASKING,
YOU KNOW MR. ZAZUETA
REPRESENTING AXA OR DOCTOR SOTO
OR MR. FREEMAN FOR THE LOCAL
CONTEXT, I MEAN, PRACTICALLY
SPEAKING, HOW DO YOU HOW DO YOU
CONCENTRATE? YOU KNOW, HOW DO
YOU FOCUS EXPENDITURES OF
CONCENTRATION OF SUPPLEMENTAL
DOLLARS, GIVEN THAT 85% OF A
SCHOOL DISTRICT'S, YOU KNOW,
BUDGET GOES FOR SALARIES AND
BENEFITS? I MEAN, IT MAKES SENSE
TO ME. I THINK IT WOULD MAKE
SENSE TO MOST PEOPLE THAT IF A
STUDENT NEEDS HELP WITH READING
OR MATH, THAT YOU GET THEM
EITHER A LITERACY COACH OR, YOU
KNOW, A MATH TUTOR, YOU KNOW,
SOME SOME TARGETED SUPPORT OR
INTERVENTION. BUT GIVEN THE
REALITIES OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS,
YOU KNOW, OPERATING WITH 85% OF
THEIR ENTIRE GENERAL FUND BUDGET
GOING TOWARD SALARIES AND
BENEFITS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU
TARGET THOSE KIND OF
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORTS? I EITHER
DOCTOR JOHNSON OR DOCTOR KIRST.
I THINK WHAT DOCTOR KIRST IS, IS
HIGHLIGHTING IS THAT WE'RE NOT
PROMOTING A ONE SIZE FITS ALL.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO PROVIDE
SOME GUIDEPOSTS ABOUT THERE ARE
PATTERNS OF INVESTMENTS THAT ARE
CONSISTENTLY HAVING IMPACTS ON
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. AND THESE
ARE THE COLLECTION OF FIVE THAT
I'VE HIGHLIGHTED. I THINK WE'RE
ALSO JUST SAYING THAT YOU CAN
HAVE A DISTRICT THAT HAS A LARGE
PROPORTION OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNERS, AND YOU CAN IMAGINE
THAT THEIR EMPHASIS WILL BE
HIRING TEACHERS WITH BILINGUAL
EXPERIENCE IN INSTRUCTION AND IN
PARTICULARLY IN THE EARLY
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL GRADES. IF YOU
HAVE A HIGH PROPORTION OF
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS, IT
WILL BE A MUCH MORE IMPORTANT
INVESTMENT ON THE EARLY
ELEMENTARY TEACHER RECRUITMENT
THAT HAVE THAT KIND OF BILINGUAL
ABILITY. I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S
NOT EVERY DISTRICT OR SCHOOL. SO
THERE'S LIKE AN ATTENTION TO THE
HETEROGENEITY IN WHAT IS THE
LARGEST, MOST DIVERSE STATE
SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY. SO WE'RE
JUST TRYING TO BE ATTENTIVE. AND
AGAIN EXHIBIT HUMILITY. AND NOT
SAYING WE KNOW ALL THE ANSWERS.
OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. FRIEDMAN.
YEAH I WOULD LOVE TO JUMP IN.
JUST AS A COUNTY OFFICE OF
EDUCATION, WE ARE IN THE
BUSINESS OF PROVIDING SUPPORT. I
THINK OF IT'S NOT IT'S NOT
ROCKET SCIENCE. IT'S META
RESEARCH. JOHN HATTIE'S EFFECT
SIZE IS TEACHER EFFICACY. AND
LIKE, WHAT CAN WE DO TO IMPROVE
THE TEACHER EFFICACY. SO IF WE
ARE LOOKING AT IMPROVING
READING, HOW IS IT THAT WE'RE
ABLE TO INCREASE THE EFFICACY OF
THE TEACHER IN THE CLASSROOM,
PROVIDING THAT INSTRUCTION?
AGAIN, KIND OF GOING TO THAT
TIER ONE AND JUST REALITY? WE
HAVE STAFFING ISSUES THAT IMPACT
ALL THINGS, ALL ASPECTS OF THAT
WORK. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE'RE
IN THE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
BUSINESS AND WE'RE TRYING TO
PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
TO INCREASE TEACHER EFFICACY IN
THE CLASSROOM, AND THE DISTRICTS
ARE SAYING, SORRY, WE CAN'T SUB
BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SUB, WE
DON'T HAVE WE HAVE A SUB
SHORTAGE. AND ACTUALLY THEY'VE
BEEN ABLE THEY'VE HAD TO USE
THEIR FUNDING TO INCREASE SUB
RATES TO ATTRACT SUBSTITUTES. SO
AGAIN, THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE
FLEXIBILITY IN THE LOCAL CONTROL
TO DO WHAT IS NEEDED TO SOLVE
THE PROBLEMS AND SO WHEN I THINK
HOW DO I GET HOW DO WE GET
BETTER. IT IS TEACHER EFFICACY.
BUT AGAIN THERE'S LEVELS TO THE
SOLVING THAT. THANK YOU. IF I.
OKAY. MR. MR. YEAH THANK YOU
CHAIR I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF I
COULD BE HELPFUL TO UNPACK. I'VE
HEARD YOUR QUESTION A COUPLE OF
TIMES AND WANTED TO POINT OUT A
COUPLE OF THINGS THAT MIGHT BE
HELPFUL. I THINK ALREADY THERE'S
BEEN REFERENCE TO IF WE TALK
ABOUT SITE BASED NEEDS AND
REALLY DRIVING MORE RESOURCES TO
THE SITES WITH THE GREATEST
NEEDS, THERE'S A FEW THINGS. AND
AGAIN, LCFF HAS NOT BEEN STATIC,
RIGHT? FOR THE PAST 11 YEARS,
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF EVOLVING
EFFORTS, ONE WHICH JUST HASN'T
COME UP. IT'S NOT THE FORMULA,
BUT I WOULD JUST HIGHLIGHT
BECAUSE THE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN
A PART OF THIS, IS INVESTING
$250 MILLION TO ENSURE THAT
NATIONALLY BOARD CERTIFIED
TEACHERS ARE WELL PREPARED AND
THEN ARE INCENTIVIZED TO GO
TEACH IN OUR HIGHEST NEED
SCHOOLS. THOSE ARE THE KINDS OF
THINGS THAT WE CAN DO TO BETTER
SERVE HIGH NEEDS. SCHOOLS ALSO,
THE UNDERLYING ASSUMPTION FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
RESOURCES WHEN GIVEN TO A LOCAL
EDUCATIONAL AGENCY IS THAT THOSE
ARE SUPPOSED TO BE FOCUSED ON
INCREASING IMPROVING THE
SERVICES FOR THE HIGHEST NEED
STUDENTS. IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO
THAT IN A WAY THAT IS DISTRICT
WIDE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A HIGHER
THRESHOLD OF JUSTIFICATION AND
RATIONALE THAT YOU HAVE TO
PROVIDE IN YOUR LOCAL CONTROL
AND ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN, WHICH
UNDERSCORES THIS NEED. IN FACT,
JUST RECENTLY, THE LEGISLATURE
WE'VE HELPED WITH THE GOVERNOR'S
LEADERSHIP HELPED PUSH THROUGH
TO HAVE EVEN INCREASED FOCUS ON
SAYING, ARE YOU REALLY LOOKING
AT, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S
AN UNDUPLICATED PUPIL GROUP OR
ANOTHER STUDENT GROUP SUCH AS
AFRICAN-AMERICAN STUDENTS, THAT
HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN
UNDERSERVED AND HAS DEEP, DEEP
ACHIEVEMENT GAPS? WHAT ARE YOU
DOING TO LOOK AT THOSE NEEDS AND
DRIVE YOUR RESOURCES? THERE? AND
YOU REFERENCED THE SALARY
SCHEDULE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A
CRITICAL ISSUE. THERE'S ALSO
STAFFING RATIOS. THAT'S WHY YOU
HAVE A CONCENTRATION GRANT ADD
ON THAT ACTUALLY WORKS AT THAT.
DECREASING THOSE STAFFING RATIOS
AT PARTICULAR SITES. SO
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU'RE
TALKING SALARY SCHEDULE BEING
THE SAME ACROSS THE BOARD, YOU
CAN ACTUALLY HAVE MORE STAFF.
THE FINAL POINT AND AGAIN, YOU
KNOW, MAKING UP FOR MY FIVE
MINUTES, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE
EXPANDED LEARNING AND
OPPORTUNITY GRANT PROGRAM, WE
LOOK AT COMMUNITY SCHOOLS. WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT A NUMBER OF THE
HUGE TRANSFORMATIVE INVESTMENTS
THAT THE GOVERNOR AND THE
LEGISLATURE HAVE DONE IN
PARTNERSHIP. THOSE HAVE BEEN
DRIVEN REALLY IN A MEANS TESTED
WAY TO TRY TO RESOURCE THOSE
SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS THAT ARE
HIGHEST NEEDS AND OFTENTIMES THE
SITES WITHIN THEM. SO I JUST
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS AND WE
THINK ABOUT HOW TO BE
DIFFERENTIAL, WE TALK ABOUT
HAVING DIFFERENTIATED SUPPORTS
FOR OUR SCHOOLS AND FOR OUR
STUDENTS. THESE ARE ALL WAYS
THAT THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
GOVERNOR HAVE ALREADY BEEN DOING
THIS IN THE PAST 11 YEARS, AND
THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO SEEK
TO BUILD ON. OKAY. THANK YOU. IF
I MAY, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
I DON'T HAVE A FIVE MINUTE TIME
LIMIT HERE. I DOCTOR KIRST, YOU
SAID THAT THERE THAT, YOU KNOW,
AS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL
ARCHITECTS OF LCFF, THAT THERE
WAS NO CLEAR IDEA ON HOW TO
ADDRESS SPECIAL EDUCATION. I, I
MEAN, CLEARLY, I KNOW AS A
FORMER SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, I,
YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZE WHAT DOCTOR
STOWE WAS SAYING ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, THE CHALLENGES OF RUNNING
A SCHOOL DISTRICT WITH, YOU KNOW,
THE UNMET SPECIAL EDUCATION
FUNDING NEEDS. DOES THE IDEA OF
HAVING A, A AN ADDITIONAL LCFF
CATEGORY FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION
STUDENTS, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE?
IS THERE A CONCERN THAT THAT MAY
INCENTIVIZE THE
OVERIDENTIFICATION OF SPECIAL
EDUCATION? STUDENTS WANT TO HEAR
YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT SPECIFIC
IDEA? YES. WELL, I WOULD REFER
YOU TO THE EXTENSIVE REPORT THAT
WESTED DID ON SPECIAL EDUCATION
FINANCE WITH VERY SPECIFIC
RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO REVAMP
IT IN CALIFORNIA. I WAS ON THE
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR
THAT STUDY, AND IT IT HAS A
DIFFERENTIAL RATES OF WEIGHTS. I
SHOULD SAY, FOR DIFFERENT KINDS
OF DISABILITIES THAT STUDENTS
ARE FUNCTIONING WITH. SO, YOU
KNOW, EXTREME DISABILITIES WOULD
GET ONE WEIGHT. AND THEN THE
MINOR LESS EXTREME DISABILITIES,
LOWER RATES. SO AMONG OTHER
THINGS. SO I THINK THAT THAT'S
THERE IS A WAY THEIR FORWARD.
AND THEY ALSO TALKED ABOUT
GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN
SEPARATE REPORTS THAT THE
LEGISLATURE COMMISSIONED. SO
YEAH, THERE'S A PROBLEM OF OVER
IDENTITY. IT COULD BE A PROBLEM
OF OVERIDENTIFICATION. AND I
THINK THERE'S WAYS OF CHECKING
ON THAT. AND, AND FINDING OUT
WHETHER THAT WHAT'S CAUSING IT.
WE HAVE VERY DIFFERENT RATES
NOW. THEY VARY ENORMOUSLY ACROSS
SCHOOL DISTRICTS. AND I THINK WE
NEED TO UNDERSTAND BETTER WHAT'S
GOING ON THERE. AND WHAT. AND
THEN WE CAN HELP ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION AS TO HOW TO ADJUST FOR
OVERIDENTIFICATION. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. I WANT TO SEE IF ANY
OF THE OTHER PANELISTS HAD ANY
FURTHER THOUGHTS ON. I JUST HAVE
ONE COMMENT ON THAT. IF I MAY.
SO AS MY COLLEAGUE FROM SHASTA
COUNTY REFERENCED TIER ONE
INSTRUCTION, AND IF THAT'S
THAT'S THE CORE INSTRUCTION IN
THE CLASSROOM THAT OCCURS EVERY
DAY. AND IF THAT IS SOLID AND
THE STUDENTS COME TO US AND, YOU
KNOW, WHETHER IT'S PRE-K OR, YOU
KNOW, KINDERGARTEN WHEN THEY
ENROLL WITH US, IF WE HAVE A
HIGH QUALITY TEACHER THAT'S
PROVIDING SOLID TIER ONE
INSTRUCTION, AND WE HAVE GOOD
SYSTEMS OF SUPPORT TO HELP THEM
THERE, I BELIEVE THAT OVER TIME,
YOU'LL SEE FEWER STUDENTS
NEEDING SPECIAL EDUCATION AT THE
UPPER GRADES, BECAUSE WE HAVE
THOSE EARLY INTERVENTIONS. AND
SO AGAIN, THE WEIGHTING AND HOW
WE MIGHT DO THAT. THERE WAS A
CONCERN WHEN THE LCFF WAS PUT
INTO PLAY REGARDING DISTRICTS
NOT EXITING STUDENTS FROM
BECOMING ENGLISH LEARNERS,
BECAUSE AGAIN, THE THEY COUNTED
TOWARD THEIR SUPPLEMENTAL OR
CONCENTRATION. YOU KNOW, I
CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR THE
BASE AND THAT THAT THE MORE
MONEY WE CAN PUT IN THOSE EARLY
INTERVENTIONS THAT WE MAY SEE
FEWER STUDENTS NEEDING SPECIAL
ED SERVICES DOWN THE ROAD. THANK
YOU. LAST I. SEVERAL PANELISTS
HAVE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE NEED
FOR A REGIONAL COLA AND DOCTOR
KIRST, YOU YOU SAID THAT THIS IS
THE ONE ASPECT IN THAT 2008
PAPER WHICH I READ, YOU KNOW,
THAT WAS NOT ACKNOWLEDGED
ULTIMATELY IN THE LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA. I WANTED TO ASK
FOR A LITTLE HISTORY LESSON. WHY
WAS IT NOT INCLUDED IN THE LCFF?
WELL, IT NEVER GOT ANY POLITICAL
TRACTION OR DISCUSSION
WHATSOEVER. I, I DON'T KNOW THE
EXACT NATURE OF THE POLITICS,
BUT THE ISSUE NEVER GOT OFF THE
GROUND. I THINK, YOU KNOW, ALL
DISTRICTS FEEL THAT THEY HAVE
SPECIAL CAUSE THAT AND IT'S VERY
DIFFICULT TO CONVINCE ANYBODY
THAT THERE YOU KNOW, LOW COST
COMPARED TO SOMEBODY ELSE. SO I
ALL I CAN SAY IS THAT, THAT IT
WAS JUST DROPPED IMMEDIATELY. IT
WASN'T LIKE THERE WAS DEBATE. IT
WASN'T LIKE THERE WAS ANY
CONSIDERATION OF HOW REGIONAL
COSTS MIGHT WORK IN TERMS OF
SPECIFIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS. AND
IT JUST DISAPPEARED, MAYBE. MR.
ZAZUETA, YOU CAN GIVE US ALSO A
STATEWIDE PERSPECTIVE. CAN YOU
TURN ON YOUR MICROPHONE, PLEASE?
THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I'LL MAKE
A GENERAL COMMENT AS IT REFERS
TO A LOT OF THESE POLICY CHANGES
THAT WERE CONSIDERED AT THE
TIME. AND I THINK FOR THOSE OF
US THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE
MAJORITY OF US WERE INVOLVED IN
ONE WAY, SHAPE OR FORM, THAT
THESE ISSUES ARE ALWAYS MUCH
HARDER IN A ZERO SUM
ENVIRONMENT. RIGHT. AND I THINK
THIS IS WHY WE HAD SO MANY OF
THESE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
WINNERS OR LOSERS, OR THIS WAS A
VERY DIFFERENT CONVERSATION IN
TERMS OF WHAT WE WERE DEALING
WITH. LCFF THE SECOND WE HAD
RUNS COME OUT RIGHT AND I DON'T
EVEN REMEMBER WHO WAS THE FIRST
ENTITY OR WHETHER IT WAS THE
STATE, BUT THE SECOND WE HAD
SPREADSHEETS ABOUT THIS IS WHAT
THIS ITERATION OF THE FORMULA
WILL MEAN FOR X DISTRICT. THE
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT CHANGED,
RIGHT? AND I THINK THIS IS THE
CHALLENGE, FRANKLY, THAT THE
STATE'S GOING TO HAVE WITH A LOT
OF THESE IDEAS ABOUT HOW DO WE
DO THIS WHILE STILL MAKING SURE
THAT THIS CONVERSATION DOESN'T
BECOME ABOUT TAKING FROM SOME TO
GIVE TO OTHERS? I MEAN, OUR
MEMBERS LOVE TALKING ABOUT WE
ALL REFRAIN FROM TALKING ABOUT
THE CHALLENGES OF BUDGETING
BASED ON ADA INSTEAD OF
ENROLLMENT. RIGHT? THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT COMES UP OVER AND
OVER BECAUSE IT'S A REAL ISSUE.
OUR OUR LEADERS HAVE TO BUDGET
ON FIXED COSTS AND MAKE
PROJECTIONS ABOUT WHAT THAT'S
GOING TO LOOK LIKE. BUT AS WE'VE
SEEN OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS,
THAT'S BEEN A VERY THAT'S THAT'S
BEEN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT'S BEEN
VERY VOLATILE. RIGHT. SO THAT'S
JUST ONE EXAMPLE. I WILL SAY
THAT KIND OF THE CONVERSATION
THAT WE OBVIOUSLY TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF THOSE MOMENTS WHERE
THE STATE, WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE
OF FUNDS THAT ARE BEING
REDIRECTED, BUT THAT REALLY AND
THAT I DON'T THINK ANY OF US
BROUGHT UP PROP 30. RIGHT. I
BELIEVE IT WAS PROP 30 AT THE
TIME. THE ONLY REASON WE WERE
ABLE EVEN TO ENGAGE IN THIS IS
BECAUSE WE HAD AN INFLUX OF NEW
REVENUES THAT WE WERE THEN ABLE
TO REDISTRIBUTE. SO I WOULD SAY
THAT THIS ISSUE, LIKE EVERY
OTHER ONE, WAS PROBABLY JUST HOW
IT WAS GOING TO PAN OUT. THE
SECOND YOU STARTED DOING
REGIONAL DIFFERENTIATION, IT WAS
GOING TO HAVE A DISPARATE IMPACT
ON WHAT PEOPLE WERE GOING TO
GET. MR. LEÓN JUST REAL QUICK.
ADDING ON TO THAT, THE HISTORY
IS JUST A COMPLEXITY. I MEAN,
THE NEEDS OF RURAL DISTRICTS,
YOU KNOW, THERE'S EXTRA COSTS
THERE. AND THEN THERE WAS
DISCUSSION ABOUT SOME HIGHER
INCOME DISTRICTS, THE PARENT
CONTRIBUTIONS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY
AREN'T PART OF THE PUBLIC. SO IT
JUST GOT VERY COMPLEX AND THAT'S
WHY IT'S DOCTOR KERR SAID. IT
WAS LIKE, WOW, THIS IS JUST TOO
MUCH TO GRAPPLE WITH. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. MISS MONTA. GOOD
AFTERNOON. THANK YOU SO MUCH. TO
THE CHAIR FOR CHAIRS FOR PULLING
THIS TOGETHER. I THINK IT'S A
VERY CRITICAL CONVERSATION. I
WANTED TO FOCUS IN ON A COUPLE
OF AREAS. ONE IS THE NOTION AND
KIND OF THE REALITY THAT WE ARE
NOW AT IN A STATE OF DECLINING
ENROLLMENT THAT WE DIDN'T
ANTICIPATE WHEN WE DEVELOPED OUT
THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING
FORMULA AND WE TALKED ABOUT IT A
LITTLE BIT. SEVERAL OF YOU ALL
DID IN YOUR PRESENTATIONS. I
WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KIND
OF DON'T END UP IN A PLACE WHERE
WE HAVE A VERY SIMPLISTIC
FORMULA THAT SAYS FEWER
STUDENTS, LESS FUNDING NEEDED. I
BELIEVE THAT THE THAT THE NATURE
OF INSTRUCTION, LIKE IF YOU
TREAT THAT AS THE KIND OF THE
CORE OF THE FUNDING DRIVER THAT
THE NATURE OF INSTRUCTION HAS
BECOME INHERENTLY MORE COMPLEX
OVER THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME
WHERE WE ARE ASKING CHILDREN,
WHERE WE ARE ASKING TEACHERS AND
SCHOOL COMMUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO
PROVIDE MORE SUPPORTS AND
SERVICES. WE HAVE A COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT TAKE FOR INSTANCE, ON
MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLNESS AND
THE IMPACT OF A CHILD'S MENTAL
HEALTH AND WELLNESS ON THEIR
ABILITY TO FULLY ENGAGE IN THEIR
INSTRUCTIONAL ACTIVITIES. SO I
JUST WANTED PANELISTS TO KIND OF
SPEAK ABOUT WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS
THEY WOULD MAKE SPECIFICALLY
AROUND HOW EITHER THROUGH
WEIGHTING FORMULAS, HOW WE WOULD
TREAT THE ADVENT OF DECLINING
ENROLLMENT AS SOMETHING THAT'S
VERY DYNAMIC FOR US RIGHT NOW
WITHIN MAKING ANY CHANGES TO
LCFF. I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR FROM
MR. PHªN FIRST AND THEN KIND OF
HEAD OVER THIS WAY. AND MR.
BROOKS, THANK YOU, MR. ALLEN.
THANK YOU, MISS BONTA. I, I
THINK THE IDEA HERE THAT WAS PUT
FORWARD WAS AS ADA ACROSS THE
STATE DROPS AS A RESULT OF
DECLINING ENROLLMENT NOT AS A
RESULT OF LOWER ATTENDANCE
YIELDS, BUT JUST AS A RESULT OF
DECLINING ENROLLMENT. IT GIVES
THE LEGISLATURE AN OPPORTUNITY,
GIVES THEM FUNDS THAT CAN BE
ALLOCATED OUT. RIGHT. BECAUSE
PROPOSITION 98 IS DRIVEN BY AT
LEAST TEST ONE IS CERTAINLY NOT
DRIVEN NOT INFLUENCED BY ADA. SO
THE POT OF MONEY IN A TEST ONE
ENVIRONMENT WOULD REMAIN X. WE
NOW HAVE FEWER KIDS TO SERVE, SO
IT SIMPLY GIVES US AN
OPPORTUNITY TO FURTHER INVEST
THAT MONEY, NOT NECESSARILY IN
CHANGING THE FORMULA, BUT IN
INCREASING RATES, WHETHER THAT'S
A BASE RATE, BUT LEAVE THE
STRUCTURE OF THE FORMULA ALONE.
AS AS CHAIR MURATSUCHI PROPOSED
A COUPLE TIMES, OR IN CHANGING
THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT AS AN
EXAMPLE, FROM 20% TO 25%, OR
EVEN, WELL, TED, BACK TO THE
ORIGINAL CONVERSATIONS. I THINK
WE WERE AT 35%, IF I REMEMBER
CORRECTLY, A LOT OF WATER UNDER
THE BRIDGE WHEN WE FIRST ROLLED
THIS OUT, RIGHT. SO THAT'S WHERE
THE OPPORTUNITY EXISTS, IS IN
ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING SOME OF
THE REMODELING TO PAY FOR THE
REMODELING, YOU WOULD USE
EXISTING PROP 98 FUNDS THAT
OTHERWISE WOULD BE ON THE TABLE
FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO CONSIDER
USING FOR SCHOOLS IN SOME OTHER
WAY. SO IT'S JUST A FOCUSED USE
OF WHAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO YOU
UNDER PROP 98. IN A DECLINING
ENROLLMENT ENVIRONMENT, WHICH
RIGHT NOW WE ARE IN THE STATE,
DEMOGRAPHER WITH THE DEPARTMENT
OF FINANCE WOULD NEED TO SPEAK
TO THIS, BUT I BELIEVE THE
CURRENT FORECAST IS THAT WE'RE
GOING TO BE IN DECLINING
ENROLLMENT THROUGH ABOUT THE MID
40S BEFORE WE START TO ACTUALLY
BEFORE WE KIND OF HIT THE BOTTOM
OUT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT THIS BIRTH
RATE IMPACT AT THE LOWER GRADES
RIGHT NOW, AND IT STILL HAS TO
WORK THROUGH THE SYSTEM. SO
WE'VE GOT A NUMBER OF YEARS OF
OPPORTUNITY HERE I THINK WOULD
BE THE POINT, MR. ALLEN. AND
THEN PERHAPS YOU ARE. AND I'LL
GO BY THEIR NAME. GOOD. I WOULD
JUST I PROBABLY WOULD JUST ECHO
WHAT MR. FINE SHARED AND JUST
NOTE THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE
OTHER PIECES THAT WE'RE ALL
LOOKING AT IS WHEN WE THINK
ABOUT EVEN IF THE TOTAL NUMBER
OF STUDENTS IS GOING DOWN, THAT
THE ACTUAL PROPORTION OF OUR
TOTAL STUDENTS WHO ARE WHAT WE
CONSIDER HIGH NEED, AND
REGARDLESS OF THE VARIOUS
METRICS WE HAVE, CONTINUES TO
INCREASE. AND THOSE COMBINED
FACTORS, I MEAN, WE OFTENTIMES
TALK ABOUT WHO WHO'S GENERATING
ADDITIONAL FUNDS. I MEAN, THAT'S
OVER TWO THIRDS OF OUR STUDENTS.
I MEAN, SO WHEN FOLKS TALK ABOUT
NOT IN THIS ROOM, BUT WE HAVE
FOLKS WHO OFTENTIMES TALK ABOUT,
OH, WHERE ARE THOSE HIGH NEEDS
STUDENTS? AS IF IT WAS GOING TO
BE A MINORITY OF STUDENTS. IT
IS. THOSE ARE OUR STUDENTS. THAT
IS CALIFORNIA STUDENTS. AND SO
WHEN WE LOOK AT THAT PROPORTION
AND WE EVEN LOOK AT A PARTICULAR
GROUPS, AND THIS IS AGAIN,
POSSIBLY WHERE THERE ARE
OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT
ITERATIONS, YOU LOOK AT UNHOUSED
STUDENTS. THE NUMBER OF UNHOUSED
STUDENTS HAS INCREASED. AND SO
AS WE SEE SOME OF THOSE
HAPPENING AT THE SAME TIME THAT
WE SEE DECLINING ENROLLMENT, YOU
KNOW, THAT'S WHERE I WOULD JUST
GO BACK TO MR. FINE'S COMMENTS
ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT
MIGHT BE PRESENTED BY THAT. SO I
JUST WANTED TO GO BACK TO SCALE
AS A COST FACTOR. OKAY. IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT NOW WHAT WHAT
WE FIND AND THIS IS REALLY
EMPIRICALLY ACROSS MANY, MANY
STUDIES IS THAT COSTS
DRAMATICALLY GO UP WHEN DISTRICT
SIZE FALLS BELOW ABOUT 2000
REALLY GOES UP. AND WHEN YOU GET
TO THE MOST RURAL DISTRICTS,
IT'S WAY UP THERE. AFTER THAT,
THE COST CURVE REALLY FLATTENS
OUT AFTER ABOUT 2000. SO IT
DEPENDS WHERE THE DECLINES
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE. BUT I
WOULD I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT WE
ALL THINK ABOUT PUTTING IN A
SCALE FACTOR THAT WE FEEL IS
APPROPRIATE, THAT ACCOUNTS FOR
THE COST OF, OF OPERATING ON A
SMALL SCALE. I LOVE THE IDEA OF
THIS ENROLLMENT OR THIS PREMIUM
AND TRYING TO PUT IT, WHETHER
IT'S IN THE BASE, IF YOU PUT IT
IN THE BASE, IT'S GOING TO BE
SPREAD OVER EVERYBODY. RIGHT?
BUT I GUESS I JUST WANT TO
REALLY BE CLEAR THAT ARE WE
COMFORTABLE WITH THE SMALL
SCHOOLS ADJUSTMENT AS IT IS
RIGHT NOW? DO WE THINK IT
REFLECTS THE ADDITIONAL COST
THAT THE VERY SMALL DISTRICTS
HAVE? AND SCALE ADJUSTMENTS CAN
BE CAN BE IMPLEMENTED IN VARIOUS
WAYS. IT COULD BE FOR CATEGORIES
OF SIZE OR YOU COULD. ECONOMISTS
HATE THAT. BY THE WAY WE DON'T
LIKE THESE CATEGORIES. WE LIKE
SMOOTH FUNCTIONS. RIGHT. SO YOU
CAN'T GAME THE SYSTEM AND TRY TO
TRY TO GET RID OF THAT ONE EXTRA
STUDENT. SO YOU GO INTO THE
SMALLER CATEGORY AND GET GET
EXTRA FUNDS. SO WE DON'T WE
DON'T LIKE DISCONTINUITIES
BECAUSE IT IT CAN CAUSE IN THE
WORST CASE, PERVERSE INCENTIVES.
RIGHT. BUT IN IN EVEN THE, THE
NORMAL CASE AS WE SEE IN TERMS
OF THE KINK, THE 55% KINK, WE
DON'T SEE A LOT OF EQUITY GAIN
BELOW THAT KINK, BUT ABOVE THAT
WE SEE HUGE EQUITY GAINS. RIGHT.
SO THAT'S A THAT'S A CLASSIC
EXAMPLE OF A DISCONTINUITY IN
HOW HOW IT MIGHT NOT WORK AS
WELL AS YOU THINK. FOR ALL
STUDENTS. THANK YOU FOR THAT. I
DID WANT TO ALSO JUST ADDRESS
THE COMMENT. I THINK THAT CAME
UP REGARDING ONE OF THE
UNDUPLICATED STUDENT SUBGROUPS
THAT WE DO HAVE AROUND ELL
STUDENTS. I THINK MR. FINE MADE
A COMMENT ABOUT JUST RECOGNIZING
THE DIVERSITY OF OUR ELL
STUDENTS. WOULD YOU JUST TO THE
PANEL BROADLY DO YOU BELIEVE
THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A FINER
GRAINED METRIC AROUND ELL
STUDENTS SO THAT WE ARE BETTER
CAPTURING ESSENTIALLY KIND OF
THE COST OF EDUCATION, GIVEN THE
ADDITIONAL FACTORS THAT ARE
EXTANT WHEN YOU HAVE SOMEBODY
WHO'S LONG TERM ELL STUDENT,
SOMEBODY WHO'S NEWER TO THE
COUNTRY AND IS MIGRANT AND
NEWCOMER, A PART OF A NEWCOMER
COMMUNITY, AND WHAT MIGHT WE BE
ABLE TO DO WHEN WE'RE THINKING
ABOUT FINE TUNING OUR LCFF WITH
REGARD TO THAT AS A DISTRICT
THAT HAS OVER 50 LANGUAGES
SPOKEN, SOMETIMES WE GET
STUDENTS FROM, YOU KNOW, A
COUNTRY AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY
ANY TEACHERS THAT SPEAK THAT
LANGUAGE OR PARAEDUCATORS OR
ANYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY THAT
THAT CAN HELP BRIDGE THOSE GAPS.
OTHER LANGUAGES WE HAVE, WE HAVE
A LARGER AMOUNT OF, OF FOLKS. SO
IT'S ALWAYS A CHALLENGE, WHETHER
IT'S A CLASSROOM TEACHER OR
ENGAGING WITH THE FAMILY TO HELP
ONBOARD THEM AND PROVIDE
SERVICES. BUT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT
THAT DISCRETE NUMBER MIGHT LOOK
LIKE. AND DO WE GIVE MORE FOR
CERTAIN STUDENTS OR LONG TERM? I
COULDN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION,
BUT IT IS A CHALLENGE WHEN WE
HAVE A IT'S LIKE THE LOW
INCIDENCE FUNDING FOR SPECIAL
EDUCATION. WHEN YOU HAVE A
COUPLE STUDENTS THAT SPEAK A
PARTICULAR LANGUAGE OR A FAMILY
MOVES IN, HOW DO YOU SERVE THEM
WITHOUT TEXTBOOKS AND OTHER
KINDS OF RESOURCES OR EVEN
PEOPLE THAT SPEAK THAT LANGUAGE?
SO TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN HELPFUL,
QUITE HONESTLY. AND GOOGLE
TRANSLATE AND SOME OF THOSE
THINGS. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW
YOU, YOU ADD LOOK AT A FUNDING
FORMULA TO, TO BETTER SERVE
THOSE THOSE FAMILIES. YEAH. ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT DOCTOR KIRSCH
BROUGHT UP, AND I THINK IT WAS
ACKNOWLEDGED AT THE BEGINNING OF
THESE CONVERSATIONS, TEN PLUS
YEARS AGO, IS THAT IT'S
UNDUPLICATED. RIGHT. AND I THINK
OUR LEADERS AND OUR FOLKS ON THE
GROUND WILL BE THE FIRST TO TELL
YOU THAT YOU HAVE A STUDENT.
LET'S SAY THAT'S AN ENGLISH
LEARNER AND A FOSTER YOUTH AND
LOW INCOME. THEY POTENTIALLY MAY
HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF NEEDS
THAN SOMEBODY WHO JUST FELL INTO
ONE OF THE CATEGORIES. RIGHT.
AND I THINK THIS WAS
ACKNOWLEDGED FROM THE GET GO. SO
I THINK IN AN IDEAL WORLD, SOME,
YOU KNOW, ACKNOWLEDGMENT,
DIFFERENTIATION, WE GET BACK
INTO THE SAME CHALLENGE IN TERMS
OF COMPLEXITY AND ESPECIALLY
GIVEN WE ALL HUNG ON, I THINK IT
WAS MR. ALLEN WHO TALKED ABOUT
THE REMODELING. I MEAN, WHEN I
HEAR THESE QUESTIONS, THEN IT'S
LIKE, OKAY, WELL, WHAT WOULD
THAT MEAN IN PRACTICE IN TERMS
OF THE OVERALL FORMULA? RIGHT,
TO. SO I THINK THAT'S ALWAYS
GOING TO BE THE BALANCE WE'RE
GOING TO HAVE TO LOOK AT AS WE
THINK ABOUT THESE POTENTIAL
CHANGES, ABOUT WHAT DOES THAT
MEAN ACROSS THE FOLD. BUT I
THINK SOME ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT
EVEN AS WE HAVE IT TODAY, THAT
YEAH, THAT THIS I THINK THE
POLICY DECISION WAS PROBABLY
MADE AT A NECESSITY. I MEAN, I
THINK IF YOU ASKED DOCTOR KIRST
AND, AND THE ORIGINAL THINKERS
ON THIS, NOW, IF THERE'S SOME
ROOM TO AT LEAST HAVE THOSE
CONVERSATIONS, I THINK IT'S A
IT'S A GOOD POINT THAT YOU
BROUGHT UP ONE EXAMPLE, AND
THERE'S A NUMBER OF THOSE CASES
ABOUT EVEN WITHIN THE CATEGORIES
THAT WE HAVE, THAT THERE'S
DIFFERENTIATION OF NEEDS THERE.
YEAH. I'LL MOVE ON FOR THE SAKE
OF TIME TO MY OTHER QUESTIONS,
IF THAT'S OKAY. I THINK ONE OF
THE AREAS THAT I ALWAYS AM VERY
COMPELLED TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE ADDRESSING IS HOW WE FULLY
INTEGRATE OUR TC SYSTEM, OR KIND
OF THE NEW GRADE THAT WE CREATED
INTO INTO THE OVERALL
RESTRUCTURING OF OUR EDUCATIONAL
SYSTEM. THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE
OF COMMENTS AROUND MAKING SURE
THAT WE HAVE KIND OF THE
INTERACTION OF LCFF REALLY TAKE
INTO ACCOUNT THAT WE HAVE THIS
NEW GRADE TK I THINK, MR.
JOHNSON, YOU PARTICULARLY
RELATED TO THE IDEA THAT WE
MIGHT NEED TO BE ABLE TO KEEP
THE SAME REIMBURSEMENT RATE BUT
OFFER A DIFFERENT GRADE SPAN
ADJUSTMENT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF GIVE
SOME SPACE FOR DISCUSSION AROUND
WHAT WE DO ABOUT TK AND THE LCFF
TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE
ACKNOWLEDGING THE DIFFERENT,
AGAIN, INSTRUCTIONAL NEEDS OF
CHILDREN IN THE IN THEIR EARLIER
YEARS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN
ADDRESSED, AND PERHAPS ALSO HAVE
MR. LEMPERT ADDRESSED THAT AS
WELL. YEAH. AND I'LL CERTAINLY
HAVE MIKE. FINE ADJOIN MY
COMMENTS HERE. BUT I THINK THE
MOST IMPORTANT THING TO
RECOGNIZE IS THAT THE EARLY,
ESPECIALLY TK, THE 10 TO 1, 12
TO 1 KIND OF STAFFING, THAT THE
SMALLER CLASS SIZES ARE SO
ESSENTIAL TO ENSURE THE STUDENT
LEARNING FOSTERS SCHOOL
READINESS. AND BECAUSE OF THAT
SMALLER CLASS SIZE NEED AND NOT
WANTING IT TO THEN BALLOON TO 30
STUDENTS IN FIRST, SECOND AND
THIRD GRADE BECAUSE SOMEHOW THE
INCENTIVE STRUCTURE OF LCFF
FORCED BY REGULATORY DEMAND, A
10 TO 1 12 TO 1 RATIO, BUT THEN
BASICALLY THEY END UP GOING TO
OVERCROWDED EARLY ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL CLASSROOMS. WHAT WE FIND
IS WHEN THAT OCCURS, WHICH IS
NOT UNCOMMON, BUT WHEN IT DOES
OCCUR, THE FADE OUT OF
ACHIEVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS FROM TK
IS MUCH MORE LIKELY. ON THE
OTHER HAND, WHEN WE FIND THEY
HAVE THOSE TK EXPERIENCES THAT
OFTEN STIMULATE LEARNING IN
THOSE EARLY GRADES, IN THAT
EARLY EXPERIENCE, THEY'RE NOT
ONLY SCHOOL READY, BUT THEY'RE
IN CLASSROOMS IN FIRST, SECOND
AND THIRD THAT MAINTAIN THOSE
INVESTMENTS SO THAT THE
CLASSROOMS ARE STILL OF
REASONABLE SIZE, WITH HIGH
QUALITY TEACHERS. AND THEN WE'RE
SEEING THE ACHIEVEMENT PERSIST
THROUGH THE END OF FOURTH GRADE
THROUGH THE END OF ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL. AND SO IT'S THAT SYNERGY
BETWEEN THE EARLY INVESTMENT AND
THAT INCLUDES THE DIAGNOSIS OF
HEALTH SCREENINGS THAT ALLOW THE
IDENTIFICATION OF SPEECH AND
LANGUAGE DELAYS. THE
IDENTIFICATION OF PARTICULAR
HEALTH NEEDS, THAT WHEN THEY'RE
WHEN THEY GO UNADDRESSED OR ARE
ONLY DIAGNOSED MUCH LATER, IT
COULD BE ADHD. OTHER KINDS OF
LEARNING CHALLENGES THAT WE
ACTUALLY SEE, NOT ONLY A
REDUCTION OF POTENTIAL SPECIAL
EDUCATION CLASSIFICATIONS, BUT
ACTUALLY FOSTERING GREATER AND
PROMOTING THAT. SO I'M TALKING
ABOUT LIKE A SYNERGY OF
EDUCATION AND HEALTH INVESTMENTS
THAT DO REQUIRE A STAFFING RATIO
TO HAVE ATTENTIVENESS TO THAT.
THE ONLY THING I'LL JUST SAY,
THOUGH, IS THE LCFF RESULTS THAT
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE
HAVE SHOWED IMPROVEMENTS FOR
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS AS
WELL. AND YOU WERE MENTIONING
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNER.
AND I HAVE A PAPER WITH SEAN
REARDON AND SARAH NOVIKOFF
STANFORD, WHERE WE SHOW THE
GREATER DIVERSITY OF ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNERS, PARTICULARLY
IN THE PARENTAL LANGUAGE AND
LINGUISTIC DIVERSITY THAT IS
INCREASED OVER THE PAST DECADE.
AND SO WE REALLY HIGHLIGHT THAT
TO SAY THAT THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNER NEED IS NOT A MONOLITH,
RIGHT? AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING
TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE
DESCRIPTIVE PORTRAIT THAT'S
UNIQUELY CALIFORNIA. LET ME BE
QUIET HERE AND CERTAINLY LET
MIKE FINE CHIME IN, BECAUSE I
KNOW THAT HE'S ATTENTIVE TO THE
PIECES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THE
LCFF AND TK ASPECTS IN
PARTICULAR. AND THE ONLY THING I
WOULD ADD IS WE HAVE SOME
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WITH
RESPECT TO THE TK BEING INCLUDED
IN THE TK THROUGH THREE GRADE
SPAN ADJUSTMENT CALCULATION. AS
WE PUSH TK DOWN A CLASS SIZE OR
RATIOS DOWN, WE HAVE TO REMEMBER
THAT WE ACCOMPLISHED THAT A
LITTLE DIFFERENT CLASS BY CLASS
A GRADE BY GRADE. SOME DISTRICTS
DO THAT WITH TWO CERTIFICATED
FOLKS. SOME DISTRICTS ACHIEVE 12
TO 1 WITH A CERTIFICATE IN
CLASSIFIED. IN FACT, THAT'S THE
MORE COMMON WAY TO DO IT. FOR
THOSE THAT USE TWO TEACHERS, TWO
CERTIFICATED, THEN THEY ARE
DILUTING THE GRADE SPAN
ADJUSTMENT POLICY INTENT OF THE
LEGISLATURE FOR GRADES K, ONE,
TWO, AND THREE. IF YOU HAVE 12
TO 1 OR 10 TO 1 AT TK TO DOCTOR
JOHNSON'S POINT, IT IT ALLOWS
YOU TO HAVE HIGHER CLASS SIZE AT
THE OTHER GRADES. AND WE DEFEAT
WHAT I THINK WAS THE VERY
INTENTIONAL POLICY OF THIS
STATE, WHICH GOES BACK ALL THE
WAY BACK TO YEARS AGO WHEN WE
INTRODUCED CLASS SIZE REDUCTION
IN ITS FIRST FORM. RIGHT. SO I
THINK WE JUST NEED TO SEPARATE
THOSE BECAUSE WE GET A
DIFFERENTIATED TREATMENT,
WHETHER A DISTRICT DECIDES TO
STAFF THAT TK ROOM WITH TWO
TEACHERS OR A TEACHER IN
CLASSIFIED, CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL
DON'T INFLUENCE THAT RATIO IN
THE WAY WE CALCULATE IT'S ONLY
CERTIFICATED. SO DEPENDING ON
HOW A DISTRICT DOES IT, IT IT
GIVES US A DISPARATE RESULT. AND
I DON'T THINK THE LEGISLATURE
INTENDED TO HAVE THAT UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCE. AND I WOULD JUST
JUMP IN BRIEFLY AGREEING WITH
ALL THAT. AND OF COURSE, YOU
KNOW, GETTING RID OF THE CLASS
SIZE REDUCTION CATEGORICAL. BUT
THAT EXTRA FOCUS ON FIRST,
SECOND AND THIRD GRADE. I WOULD,
HOWEVER, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE
THERE'S NO CONFUSION HERE. I
MEAN, TK IS OUR UNIVERSAL
PRESCHOOL, WHICH IS ESSENTIAL
FOR CALIFORNIA TO CATCH UP WITH
THE REST OF THE WORLD. AND THAT
THAT CLASS SIZE, THAT 10 TO 1 IS
CRITICAL. AND SO NOT TO LOSE
SIGHT OF THAT AS WE FOCUS ON
EARLY GRADES, NOT MAYBE FINDING
DISTRICTS IN THE SHORT TERM,
WHICH IS ANOTHER ISSUE WHICH
MIGHT NOT BE THE BEST. BUT BUT
REALLY KEEPING THAT FOCUS ON IT
BEING DEVELOPMENTALLY
APPROPRIATE FOR TK AND JUST REAL
QUICK, AS ASSEMBLYMEMBER BONTA,
YOU HAD ASKED EARLIER, JUST FOR
CLARIFICATION AND IT'S COME UP
SEVERAL TIMES NOW THAT DECLINING
ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND. TO YOUR
POINT, WE SHOULD BE REINVESTING.
THAT GETS US A STEP. BUT NOT AS
FAR AS WE NEED TO GO ON. REALLY
MAKING SURE OUR SCHOOLS ARE
APPROPRIATELY FUNDED. THANK YOU.
ONE MORE SORRY. THE CONCEPT
AROUND KIND OF A REGIONAL COLA.
WE ARE IN A DIFFERENT SPACE WITH
IN HEALTHCARE, FOR INSTANCE, WE
JUST WENT THROUGH A PRETTY
SIGNIFICANT DEBATE ABOUT THAT. I
WANTED TO JUST HAVE MISS
HARDIMAN COMMENT ON WHAT THE
POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF APPROACHING
OUR COLA WITH. AGAIN, KIND OF A
FINER GRAIN THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR
A REGIONAL COLA. WHAT THAT WHAT
YOU BELIEVE THAT MIGHT DO TO FOR
WORKFORCE ISSUES ACROSS THE
STATE. SURE. AND TO CLARIFY, YOU
KNOW, I THINK CTA DOESN'T HAVE
AN OFFICIAL POSITION ON THIS,
BUT IT'S CERTAINLY COME UP FROM
OUR MEMBERS THAT ARE NOT YOU
KNOW, CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE IN
THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THEY
TEACH IN, AND THEY HAVE TO
COMMUTE VERY FAR AWAY AND SO WE
ARE DEFINITELY INTERESTED IN
LOOKING AT THAT, BEING ABLE TO
PROVIDE SOME SORT OF DIFFERENT
RATE FOR THOSE, YOU KNOW,
POTENTIALLY THOSE DISTRICTS THAT
HAVE THOSE VERY HIGH COSTS SO
THAT TEACHERS ARE ABLE TO
POTENTIALLY LIVE IN THOSE THOSE
NEIGHBORHOODS AND TEACH THOSE
STUDENTS. THANK YOU, MISS BONTA.
MR. HOOVER. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. I REALLY APPRECIATED THE
COMMENTS OR THE QUESTIONS
ASSEMBLYMEMBER BONTA BROUGHT UP
RELATING TO ELL STUDENTS. AND I
KIND OF WANTED TO BUILD OFF THAT
A LITTLE BIT WITH, I GUESS, A
QUESTION FOR WHOEVER WOULD LIKE
TO ANSWER. MY DISTRICT HAS A
SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT'S IN A VERY
UNIQUE POSITION FROM THE
STANDPOINT IS WHERE WE HAVE AN
ENTIRE COMMUNITY THAT IS WELL
ABOVE THE 55% ELL THRESHOLD.
HOWEVER, IT IS WITHIN A UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT IS FAR
BELOW THE 55%. BECAUSE OF THAT,
IT'S ONE OF THE ONLY DISTRICTS
IN THE REGION IN MY COUNTY THAT
DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR
CONCENTRATION GRANT DOLLARS. SO
I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING.
YOU KNOW, EARLIER THE COMMENT
MADE ABOUT HOW STANDARDIZED
ACCOUNT CODE STRUCTURE DOES NOT
ACTUALLY PROVIDE OBSTACLES. IT
WOULD JUST BE SIMPLY THE
LEGISLATURE DECIDING THAT YOU
KNOW, THINGS COULD BE DONE A
LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. SO I GUESS
MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE
FEASIBILITY OF EVEN, SAY, MAYBE
A CONCENTRATION GRANT MONEY
BEING CALCULATED AT THE SCHOOL
SITE LEVEL VERSUS CALCULATED AT
THE DISTRICT LEVEL FOR THESE,
YOU KNOW, INSTANCE, UNIQUE
INSTANCES. AND I'M SURE MY
DISTRICT ISN'T THE ONLY ONE
DEALING WITH THIS, WHERE YOU DO
HAVE A LOT OF STUDENTS THAT ARE
NOT GETTING THAT ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT BECAUSE OF THAT DISTRICT
WIDE FORMULATION. SO I WAS JUST
CURIOUS IF ANYONE HAD ANY
COMMENTS ON THAT. I'LL START
SIR. SO FIRST, ON THE
STANDARDIZED ACCOUNT CODE
STRUCTURE, IT REALLY DEALS WITH
THE LOCAL DISTRICTS ACCOUNTING
AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND THEN
REPORTING. RIGHT WHERE WE HAVE
TO START IN THIS PARTICULAR
CONVERSATION IS IN THE FUNDING
THAT THE STATE FIRST DOES. SO
FIRST WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WE
ALREADY IDENTIFY UNDUPLICATED
ACCOUNTS BY SCHOOL SITE THAT'S
READILY AVAILABLE DATA. WHAT WE
DON'T DO TODAY IS REPORT AVERAGE
DAILY ATTENDANCE BY SCHOOL SITE.
WE LOCAL DISTRICTS HAVE THAT
DATA, BUT IT'S NOT ADA IS
AGGREGATED WHEN IT'S FOR A
DISTRICT WHEN IT'S REPORTED TO
THE STATE. SO THE FIRST BURDEN
HERE IS TO BREAK OUT ADA BY
SCHOOL SITE AT THE STATE LEVEL
FROM A REPORTING WE WOULD NEED
TO PUT MAKE AN INVESTMENT IN
TECHNOLOGY AND PROBABLY AT THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF ED SOME
STAFFING RELATED TO THAT. NOT
PROBABLY PROBABLY DIDN'T. THEY
PROBABLY DIDN'T APPRECIATE THAT
CAVEAT. THEY WOULD DEFINITELY
NEED SOME HELP WITH REGARD TO
STAFFING. ONCE WE HAVE THAT
DATA, THEN THE ALLOCATION
PROCESS JUST FOLLOWS THE
FORMULA, RIGHT? THE SECONDARY
QUESTION IS IF YOU WANT TO
ACCOUNT HOW EACH SCHOOL OR HOW
EACH DISTRICT, THEN ARE SPENDING
THOSE FUNDS, THAT'S WHERE SACS
IS OR SORRY TO USE THE ACRONYM
OR THE STANDARDIZED ACCOUNT CODE
STRUCTURE IS FLEXIBLE ENOUGH TO
DO THAT. WE JUST DON'T REQUIRE
IT TODAY. I THINK WE HAVE TO
REMEMBER THERE'S AN IMPORTANT
PRINCIPLE HERE, AND THAT IS THE
LCFF BASE GRANT, SUPPLEMENTAL
AND CONCENTRATION GRANT ARE ALL
TREATED AS UNRESTRICTED FUNDS
FOR THE LOCAL DISTRICT TO MAKE A
DECISION DRIVEN BASED ON THEIR
PARTNER'S INPUT AND THEIR
EXPERTISE OF THEIR STAFF, AND
HOW ALL THAT COMES TOGETHER IN
THE LCAP SPECIFICALLY FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION.
RIGHT. SO WE DON'T REQUIRE THAT
THEY BREAK THOSE DOLLARS OUT.
NOW, MANY DISTRICTS DO FOR JUST
INTERNAL TRACKING AND
ACCOUNTABILITY. BACK TO THE
LCAP. WHAT DID WE SAY WE WERE
GOING TO DO? WHAT DID WE
ACTUALLY DO BEST PRACTICE WOULD
BE TO DO THAT, BUT WE DON'T
MANDATE THAT THEY DO THAT TODAY.
SO TWO PIECES TO THE EQUATION.
ONE IS DON'T AGGREGATE ADA. AND
THAT THUS WILL TAKE A 10,000
LINE SPREADSHEET AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF ED AND PROBABLY
MAKE IT 100,000 LINES. RIGHT.
AND THE NEED TO MANAGE THAT. AND
THEN WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM AN
ACCOUNTABILITY STANDPOINT AND
REPORTING BACK FROM THE LOCAL
DISTRICT. AND I WOULD JUST ADD,
AS SOMEONE WHO USES THOSE DATA A
LOT AND AT THE DETAILED SCHOOL
LEVEL, AND THEN LINK IT TO THE
STUDENT LEVEL RECORDS, ETC, WHAT
WHAT MIKE IS SAYING IS
DEFINITELY TRUE. I THINK THE ONE
THING I WOULD JUST SAY IS WE'RE
THE MOST TECHNOLOGICALLY
INNOVATIVE STATE IN THE COUNTRY.
OUR LCAP NEED TO BE DIGITIZED.
AND WHAT I'M SAYING ABOUT THAT
IS NOT JUST A FORMULA. LIKE NOT
JUST ARCHAIC. I'M SAYING TO
FOSTER THE DEVELOPMENT OF BEST
PRACTICES, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT
OTHER DISTRICTS WHO ARE DOING
BETTER IN A PARTICULAR WAY AND
ALLOCATING RESOURCES, WHAT
THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING, AND NOT
DIGITIZING IT DOESN'T FOSTER
THAT KIND OF INTER-DISTRICT
LEARNING. AND FROM A SYSTEM WIDE
IMPROVEMENT, THAT'S WHAT I THINK
IS ESSENTIAL. AND IT CREATES
MORE TRANSPARENCY. THE REASON
I'M SAYING THIS IS BECAUSE,
LIKE, YOU CAN BE A DISTRICT AND
A DISTRICT LEADER, WE GOT
SUPERINTENDENTS RIGHT HERE,
RIGHT, WHO DECIDE I WANT TO
STRATEGICALLY ALLOCATE SOME OF
MY BEST PRINCIPALS TO SOME OF
THE MOST DISADVANTAGED SCHOOLS
IN MY DISTRICT. HAVING THE
STABLE LEADERSHIP OF SOME OF THE
BEST PRINCIPALS IS SOME OF THE
BEST ATTRACTORS TO SOME OF THE
BEST TEACHING ABILITY AND SKILL
IN THE PLACE, LIKE THEY HAVE
STABLE PRINCIPAL, CREATES MUCH
MORE ON RAMPS TO HIGH QUALITY
TEACHERS WANTING TO WORK EVEN IN
A MORE DISADVANTAGED PLACE. THEN
THAT PRINCIPAL MAY DECIDE TO
SAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A
HIGHER TEACHER SALARY SCHEDULE
FOR TEACHING. IN SOME OF THOSE
MORE DISADVANTAGED SCHOOLS. THE
EVIDENCE, THEN MAY SHOW THAT
THAT YIELDED BETTER FRUIT IN
TERMS OF STUDENT SUCCESS. THAT
THEN CREATES THE KIND OF
KNOWLEDGE THAT OTHER DISTRICTS
CAN THEN ADOPT SO THAT WE'RE
POSITIVE OUTLIERS IS SPREADING
LIKE THOSE BEST PRACTICES.
THAT'S NOT WHAT CURRENTLY IS
BEING, I THINK, DONE AT THE RATE
THAT COULD BE POSSIBLE. I
APPRECIATE IT. AND ONE LAST ONE,
I'LL JUST BE MAKE IT AS QUICK AS
I CAN HERE. TALKING ABOUT
DECLINING ENROLLMENT, TALKING
ABOUT ADA. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE
SOME WAYS, I GUESS CURRENTLY
BUILT IN TO ADDRESS OR MAYBE
SOFTEN THE DECLINING ENROLLMENT
ISSUE, GIVING SCHOOL DISTRICTS
THE ABILITY TO, FOR EXAMPLE, USE
CURRENT YEAR, ADA PRIOR YEAR,
ADA, OR AN AVERAGE OF THOSE
THREE YEARS OF ADA. I GUESS MY
QUESTION. IT'S A TWO PARTER, AND
THE SECOND ONE MIGHT BE A LITTLE
BIT TRICKIER, BUT THE FIRST ONE
WOULD BE WHAT IS KIND OF WHAT
WE'RE SEEING THE MOST COMMONLY
USED WHEN IT COMES TO AND MAYBE
FOR OUR SUPERINTENDENTS OR EVEN
MR. ZAZUETA ABOUT, YOU KNOW,
WHAT, WHICH ONE OF THOSE IS THE
MOST COMMONLY USED IN CALIFORNIA?
AND THE SECOND PART WOULD BE,
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE NEARLY 1300
CHARTER SCHOOLS IN OUR STATE. WE
HAVE YOU KNOW, OVER 670,000
CHARTER SCHOOL STUDENTS SINCE
CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE ONLY ALLOWED
TO USE CURRENT YEAR, ADA AND I
WANTED TO SEE, YOU KNOW, HOW
DOES THAT SERVE OUR KIND OF
EQUITABLE GOALS IN CALIFORNIA?
IF WE'RE NOT ALLOWING THOSE
THOSE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
TO ALSO USE THESE OTHER TWO
OPTIONS? I'LL TAKE THE QUESTION
ON THE BREAKOUT IN WHAT METHOD
OF ADA AND ACTUALLY THE
DEPARTMENT OF ED'S
REPRESENTATIVE IS REALLY THE
EXPERT HERE UP THROUGH THIS YEAR
OR I'M SORRY, UP THROUGH LAST
YEAR, ONCE WE MADE THAT POLICY
CHANGE, THE MAJORITY OF SCHOOL
DISTRICTS BY FAR USED THE THREE
YEAR AVERAGE FOR THE VERY REASON
THAT WE INTRODUCED THAT PROPOSAL
IN IN THAT YEAR'S BUDGET THAT
THE GOVERNOR INTRODUCED THAT
PROPOSAL IN THAT YEAR'S BUDGET.
AND THAT WAS BECAUSE IT BROUGHT
STABILITY AS WE CROSS INTO
DURING THE PANDEMIC, AS WE
CROSSED JULY 1ST INTO THE NEW
FISCAL YEAR, THAT DYNAMIC
CHANGES DRAMATICALLY, AND IT
GOES BACK TO WHAT IT
HISTORICALLY WAS, WHICH IS MOST
DISTRICTS ARE PROBABLY BECAUSE
MOST DISTRICTS ARE DECLINING.
THEY'RE NOW USING THE PRIOR YEAR
ADA, BECAUSE STARTING JULY 1ST
OF THIS YEAR, THE THREE YEAR
AVERAGE NO LONGER INCLUDES
PRE-PANDEMIC DATA. SEE
PRE-PANDEMIC DATA WAS WAS
ELEVATING THE AVERAGE ADA. NOW
OUR THREE YEAR FORMULA ONLY USES
PANDEMIC YEARS OR POST PANDEMIC
YEARS WHERE IT WAS LOWER SO THAT
THAT CHANGE HAS HAPPENED AND
DISTRICTS ARE FEELING THE IMPACT
OF THAT. THERE'S NO QUESTION
THEY THEY'VE BEEN THEY'VE BEEN I
SHOULDN'T SAY, ARTIFICIALLY
INCREASED, BUT BUT THERE WAS A
SLIGHT ARTIFICIAL INCREASE IN
THEIR ADA. RIGHT THAT WE WERE
FUNDING OF FUNDED ADA, I SHOULD
SAY. AND NOW THAT JUST THE
DYNAMICS OF IT HAVE GONE AWAY,
THE CHOICE IS STILL THERE. I'M
SORRY, I SHOULDN'T CALL IT A
CHOICE. THE DISTRICT GETS
WHATEVER'S BEST FOR THEM. IT'S
AUTOMATIC. THEY DON'T CHOOSE ONE
OR THE OTHER OR ONE OF THE
THREE. THEY GET WHATEVER GIVES
THEM THE MOST INCREASE IN
FUNDING. AS FAR AS CHARTER
SCHOOLS, THAT'S A POLICY ISSUE
THAT'S BEST ADDRESSED BY
SOMEBODY ELSE. ANYONE? OKAY.
PLEASE. I'M NOT TOUCHING THAT
LAST ONE. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY
JUST TO I WANT TO SPEAK TO MY TO
MY COUNTY AND DECLINING
ENROLLMENT IS A COMPLICATED
ISSUE. AND I DON'T WANT TO
OVERSIMPLIFY IT. AND I'D JUST
LIKE TO POINT OUT A LITTLE BIT
OF PERSPECTIVE BEYOND JUST BIRTH
RATE. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO SEE
WHAT STATEWIDE PRIVATE SCHOOL
AFFIDAVIT NUMBERS LOOK LIKE
POST-PANDEMIC, BECAUSE I KNOW
THAT A LOT OF FOLKS LEFT OUR
SYSTEM NOT BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T
BORN, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY
SCHOOLS ADDRESS SOME OF OUR
PUBLIC HEALTH IN RESPONSE TO THE
COVID PANDEMIC. AND ALSO
IMMUNIZATION AND VACCINATION
LEGISLATION. SO I DON'T WANT TO
OVERSIMPLIFY IT BY JUST SAYING
DECLINING ENROLLMENTS BECAUSE
PEOPLE AREN'T BEING BORN IN JUST
TO SPEAK, JUST TO SPEAK TO THAT,
TO KIND OF CLOSE THAT COMMENT.
WHILE IT VARIES A LITTLE BIT BY
COUNTY AND REGION, AND MIKE
CERTAINLY SUPERINTENDENT FREEMAN
CERTAINLY HAS A DIFFERENT NUMBER
IN SHASTA THAN MAYBE ELSEWHERE.
IT IT DID PRIVATE SCHOOL
AFFIDAVITS, AFFIDAVITS AND
ENROLLMENT BOTH DID GO UP DURING
THE PANDEMIC, BUT THEY ARE
SETTLING BACK TO THEIR
HISTORICAL NORM. BUT THEY ARE
ALSO INSIGNIFICANT COUNTS IN THE
CONTEXT OF DECLINING ENROLLMENT.
THEY JUST SIMPLY DON'T HAVE THAT
MUCH OF AN OF AN IMPACT THAT MAY
VARY A LITTLE BIT BY DISTRICT.
RIGHT? BUT STATEWIDE THEY ARE
INSIGNIFICANT. THANK YOU, MR.
HOOVER. MR. MURATSUCHI HAD ONE
FINAL QUESTION. THANK YOU. I
THIS WHOLE LINE OF DISCUSSION IS,
YOU KNOW, MADE ME WANT TO ASK
THIS FOLLOW UP QUESTION, WHICH
IS SOME OF THEM ARE LEMPERT WERE
YOU SENATOR OR ASSEMBLY MEMBER?
ASSEMBLY MEMBER. LEMPERT YOU I
LIKE THIS THE THIS THIS CONCEPT
OF A DECLINING ENROLLMENT
DIVIDEND. AND I WANTED TO TAKE
THAT TO ADDRESS THIS TO MR.
ALLEN AS THE SPECIAL ADVISER
ADVISER ON EDUCATION TO THE
GOVERNOR. YOU KNOW, GIVEN THAT
OUR THE FOCUS OF, YOU KNOW, LCFF
IS ON EQUITY AND CLOSING THE
ACHIEVEMENT GAP, AND GIVEN THE
DATA, I BELIEVE DOCTOR JOHNSON,
IN ONE OF YOUR SLIDES, CITES,
YOU KNOW, THAT THAT WE CAN MAKE
THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IN
CLOSING THE ACHIEVEMENT GAP WITH
THROUGH EARLY EDUCATION, EARLY
CHILDHOOD EDUCATION,
INVESTMENTS. YOU KNOW, IT ALWAYS
SEEMED TO ME TO MAKE SENSE THAT
IF WE HAVE DECLINING ENROLLMENT,
YOU KNOW, DEMOGRAPHICALLY,
STATEWIDE, YOU KNOW, LESS, LESS
ENROLLMENT. SAME, HOPEFULLY MORE
PROP 98 FUNDING FUNDING WITH
LARGER BUDGETS. WHY NOT JUST
INVEST THOSE DOLLARS IN EARLY
EDUCATION, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE,
MANDATORY KINDERGARTEN? I TAKE
THAT AS A MANDATORY KINDERGARTEN
QUESTION. I THINK THAT WHAT
WE'VE SEEN IS AS A STATE, I
MEAN, I CAN BRIEFLY ADDRESS THAT
MANDATORY KINDERGARTEN HAS NOT
BEEN INCLUDED IN THE
LEGISLATURE'S BUDGET THAT HAS
MOVED FORWARD. SO THAT THAT'S
ONE EASY ANSWER ON WHY THAT
HASN'T MOVED FORWARD. BUT BUT
JUST ON THAT IDEA, IF WE HAVE A
DECLINING ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND,
IF OUR IF OUR K-12 ENROLLMENT IS
DECLINING, YOU KNOW, THEN THAT
OPENS UP, I THINK. WELL, I WOULD
JUST UNDERSCORE AND I THINK IT'S
BEEN TOUCHED ON REPEATEDLY
THROUGHOUT THE DISCUSSION TODAY
THAT ONE OF THE KEY THINGS THAT
CALIFORNIA, AS A STATE FOR THE
GOVERNOR AND FOR THE LEGISLATURE
HAS BEEN FOCUSED ON IS ENSURING
THE FULL IMPLEMENTATION OF
TRANSITIONAL KINDERGARTEN AND
UPK IN THE 2526 SCHOOL YEAR.
THAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT
REACHING OUT AND REACHING THOSE
EARLIEST GRADES. AND IF WE LOOK
AT OTHER DIFFERENTIAL
INVESTMENTS, THEY'VE REALLY
FOCUSED A TON OF THAT ARE IN THE
EARLIER YEARS AND EARLY GRADES.
SO I'D SAY THERE'S PROBABLY
WIDESPREAD AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF
THE IMPORTANCE OF THOSE EARLY
INTERVENTIONS. IT GOES TO WHAT
WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER ABOUT TIER
ONE INSTRUCTION AND THOSE
EARLIEST YEARS. I THINK THERE'S
A BROAD AND WIDESPREAD AGREEMENT
THAT UNDERSCORES WHAT THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR
HAVE BEEN ON. SOME OF THOSE
INVESTMENTS. AND I JUST WANT TO
CLARIFY, SINCE THE TERM, THE
REINVESTMENT I HIGHLIGHTED A FEW
TIMES OUR PROPOSAL AND OUR
SUGGESTION WOULD BE TO DIVIDE
THAT BETWEEN INCREASING THE
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
RATES AND THE BASE. AND JUST AS
A LARGER POINT, YOU KNOW, JUST
LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT DISTRICT
VERSUS DISTRICT, I THINK WE RUN
INTO REAL TROUBLE WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT EARLY CHILDHOOD VERSUS
K-12 VERSUS HIGHER ED. AND
THAT'S NOT A PIE IN THE SKY
STATEMENT. LOOK AT OTHER STATES.
AND SO LET'S FOCUS ON OTHER
PARTS OF GOVERNMENT WHERE WE
RANK AMONG THE TOP 1 OR 2 OR
THREE PER CAPITA. AND SO WE DO
REAL DAMAGE TO KIDS. AND
FAMILIES WHEN WE SAY, LET'S TAKE
FROM K-12, EARLY CHILDHOOD OR,
YOU KNOW, OTHER WAY AROUND THAT
SAID, I LIKE WHERE YOU'RE HEADED
WITH THIS. WE NEED TO INVEST
MASSIVELY IN OUR EARLY CHILDHOOD
SYSTEM, INCLUDING CHILDCARE. BUT
WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR HOW WE OUR
TAXES, WE CAN DO THAT. IF WE
REALLY PUT THE FOCUS ON
PRIORITIZING EDUCATION PRENATAL
TO HIGHER ED AND THEN SURE,
OTHER PARTS OF THE BUDGET MIGHT
HAVE TO SUFFER, BUT THAT GETS TO
WHAT IS OUR PRIORITY. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT VERY
GOOD LAST POINT. MY CHAIRMAN OF
SUU KYI AND RAISED BY OTHERS ON
ADJUSTING DIFFERENT COST
FACTORS. I THINK THAT'S A TERM
MR. LEVIN USED. SO I THINK
THAT'S THAT'S SOMETHING TO
CONSIDER. I MEAN, IT'S ONE THING
TO SAY WE'RE DOING TK, WHICH IS
A GREAT INVESTMENT, AS WE KNOW
FROM THE DATA AND THE RESEARCH,
BUT IF WE ARE THEN LATER NOT
INVESTING IN THE SAME WAY TO
CONTINUE THAT IN GRADES, GRADES
K THROUGH THREE, WITH LARGER
CLASSROOMS, THEN WHAT ARE WE
REALLY DOING? AND SO WHEN IT
COMES TO A THE USE OF A DIVIDEND,
FOCUSING THAT INVESTMENT IN THE
RIGHT WAY AS, AS OPPOSED TO
CREATING MAYBE NEW PROGRAMS THAT
DON'T CONTINUE TO DOUBLE DOWN ON
THE INVESTMENTS THAT YOU ALL
WORK HARD TO SORT OF CREATE
THROUGH OUR NEW FORMULA AND THAT
NEED TO GO GO GOING FORWARD. SO
I THINK LOOKING AT ADDITIONAL
FACTORS TO ADJUST IS SOMETHING
THAT IS A ACTIONABLE ITEM. AND
CERTAINLY LOOKING FOR YOUR
CONTINUED FEEDBACK ON THAT,
WHETHER IT'S THE REGIONAL
DIFFERENTIATING, USING DIFFERENT
COLA, ALTHOUGH AS OUTLINED IN
OUR LA LA REPORT, YOU KNOW,
SEVERAL YEARS OF BEYOND COLA
ADJUSTMENTS, AT LEAST, AND WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS. SO AGAIN, NOBODY'S
SAYING IT'S SUFFICIENT. BUT THAT
HAS BEEN DONE. AND SO WE LOOKING
AT THAT LOOKING AT ADD ONS I
MEAN THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE
IS SOMETHING THERE. IT'S WE WERE
TALKING ABOUT SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNTS OF MONEY. AND IS THAT A
POTENTIAL DIVIDEND OF SOME TYPE
TO, TO HELP GROW THE BASE? I
STAY WITH THE ANALOGY THAT WAS
MADE ON THE, ON THE HOUSE. AND,
YOU KNOW, IT'S THE ONLY THING WE
GOT TO REMEMBER IS IT FLOODED
NOT LONG AGO. COVID IS WHAT IT
WAS, RIGHT? AND WE PROBABLY NEED
TO MAKE SURE WE INVEST. AND
THERE WERE SOME DOLLARS TO DO
THAT, BOTH FROM THE STATE AND
MAINLY FROM THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. AND THAT WAS ALL
GOOD. BUT THAT DID LEAVE SOME
EFFECTS, RIGHT? WHEN THERE'S
FLOODING IN A HOME YOU CAN
SUFFER FROM, THE MOLD CAN CREATE
ASTHMA. I SUFFER FROM ASTHMA. SO
I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THIS
CASE, OUR KIDS, THERE'S LEARNING
LOSS THAT HAPPENED. THAT WAS
VERY REAL. AND SO HOW DO WE
ADDRESS THAT OR ADJUST THAT
AGAIN IS IT'S ANOTHER FACTOR IN
THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS FOR THE
FOR THE STUDENTS WHO THE COHORT
OF STUDENTS WHO LIVED THROUGH
THAT. AND WE MUST INVEST IN THEM
IN WAYS THAT IS BEYOND PERHAPS
WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS SUFFICIENT
EVEN BEFORE THAT HAPPENED. AND
SO I THINK ALL THOSE THINGS NEED
TO BE REALLY, REALLY FOCUSED ON
AND THEN JUST THE LAST THING,
AND IF ANYBODY HAS THOUGHTS ON
THIS FEEL FREE TO JUMP IN. BUT,
YOU KNOW, HOW CAN WE TALK ABOUT
WHAT WASN'T ADDRESSED BEFORE,
WHICH IS ADEQUACY. RIGHT. AND IT
WAS FOR A REASON AND A PURPOSE,
PERHAPS. BUT WE ARE NOW HAVING
THAT CONVERSATION BECAUSE IT'S
AN IMPORTANT ONE TO HAVE, THANKS
TO THE WORK THAT I KNOW MR.
MURATSUCHI HAS BEEN DOING. BUT
MANY OF YOU, WHAT WHAT CAN WE DO
WITHOUT THE FEAR OF SCARCITY?
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO DO. SO MAYBE A
DIVIDEND OR MAYBE SWITCHING SOME
THINGS HERE AND THERE MIGHT HELP
US CREATE OR ELIMINATE THAT FEAR
OF SCARCITY. BUT THEN ALSO THE
ONE THAT ALWAYS HANGS OVER,
WHICH IS LITIGATION. RIGHT. AND
SO HOW DO WE HOW DO WE TALK
ABOUT THAT IN A WAY. AND I THINK
YOU'VE PRESENTED SOME CONCEPTS
AND IDEAS. BUT I MAYBE TO END
THIS, JUST ASK, IS THERE
ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD
BEFORE WE MOVE ON AND I'D ALSO
IF THE LA OFFICE OR DEPARTMENT
WANTS TO SAY ANYTHING, THIS
WOULD BE A GOOD TIME. YOU. I'M
SURE YOU TOOK A LOT OF NOTES, SO
I'M JUST GOING TO SPAN THE ROOM.
AND IF YOU WANT TO SAY
SOMETHING, PLEASE, PLEASE JUMP
ON. THE FRONT DAIS, ANY ANYTHING
YOU REALLY WANT TO REALLY WANT
TO SAY YOU DIDN'T GET A CHANCE
TO SAY IT. GO AHEAD. NO. OKAY.
SO THAT THAT REPORT THAT THAT I
LED THAT YOU REFERRED TO EARLIER
ON, THAT WAS AN ADEQUACY STUDY,
RIGHT? ONE OF FOUR THAT HAS BEEN
DONE FOR CALIFORNIA. I LED TWO
OF THOSE, ALL OF THEM SAID THE
SAME THING, THAT WE HAVE TO
SPEND SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. I WAS
THE GUY WHO HAD TO BASICALLY DO
THE ROAD SHOW AND SAY, THIS IS
WHAT I FOUND, THIS IS HOW MUCH
MORE. AND I GOT A LOT OF STICKER
SHOCK. I GOT A LOT OF BIG WIDE
EYES. I WOULD SAY THAT THAT ONE
THING THAT CAME UP, I THINK
EARLIER ON, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO
SAID IT HERE, WAS TO TRY TO
COMPARE US TO OTHER STATES. SO I
SHOWED THAT EVEN THE ADEQUATE
COST FIGURE THAT I CAME UP WITH,
AND IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 30
PLUS PERCENT MORE THAN WE WERE
CURRENTLY SPENDING. SOUNDS
ASTRONOMICAL. THAT ADEQUACY
LEVEL WAS STILL LESS THAN THE
TOP 5 OR 6 SPENDERS. NEW YORK,
VERMONT, ALL THESE NEW ENGLAND
STATES. MASSACHUSETTS, RIGHT?
AND IN SOME CASES SIGNIFICANTLY
LESS THAN WHAT THEY WERE
CURRENTLY SPENDING AT THE TIME.
THIS WAS ALL 16, $17. SO IT IS
POSSIBLE IF WE PUT IN THE FISCAL
EFFORT, SOMEBODY ELSE MENTIONED
THAT WE'RE THE FIFTH LARGEST
ECONOMY IN THE WORLD. SO IT'S
POSSIBLE, I THINK, THAT WE HAVE
TO MAP A WAY TO GET THERE. IF WE
SET AN ADEQUACY TARGET.
REMEMBER, THAT'S THE FIRST
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION I PUT TO
THE GROUP. HOW BIG MUST THAT PIE
BE? IF WE HAVE THAT TARGET, WE
CAN ALWAYS WORK TOWARDS IT. WE
SHOULDN'T SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO
THIS OVERNIGHT. THAT PROBABLY IS
NOT POSSIBLE, BUT WE ARE NO
STRANGERS TO PHASE-IN AND INDEED
LCFF WAS PHASED IN IN TERMS OF
THE FUNDING. AND SO WE SHOULD
MAKE A PLAN TO DO THAT. I MEAN,
THAT'S IT'S PRETTY COMMON SENSE,
RIGHT? BUT IT TAKES A LOT OF A
LOT OF PLANNING. I MEAN, THE
ONLY OTHER THING THAT I CAN SAY
IS MY EXPERIENCE IN NEW MEXICO.
WE DEVELOPED A FORMULA THAT WAS
GREAT. BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE
LOVED THE FORMULA. HOWEVER, IT
DIDN'T COME WITH A COMPATRIOT.
REVENUE SOURCE. RIGHT. SO WE
DEVELOPED THE BILL THAT HAD THE
FORMULA IN IT. BUT WE THERE WAS
NO BILL THAT THEY DEVELOPED THAT
HAD THE REVENUES. AND THEY'RE A
MUCH POORER STATE. SO A LOT OF
THEIR REVENUES COME FROM, YOU
KNOW, MINERALS, THINGS LIKE
THAT. SO IT IT IT DIED, YOU
KNOW, IT DIED. IT WAS A GREAT
FORMULA THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN
ADEQUATE AND ADEQUATE,
EQUITABLE. BUT AND THAT WAS, I
THINK, A MERE 14% INCREASES. SO
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. THANK
YOU. ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SHARE.
DO YOU WANT TO LEAVE US WITH
ANYTHING? WE'RE GOOD. OKAY.
COULD I ONE MORE THING? I WOULD
JUST SAY OUR FOLKS ARE WORKING
SO HARD, OUR CLASSROOM TEACHERS
ARE WORKING HARD, OUR
SUPERINTENDENTS AND
ADMINISTRATORS ARE WORKING HARD.
I WOULD NOT CONFUSE THEM.
GETTING THE JOB DONE WITH. WE'RE
GOOD. AND I THINK I THINK THAT
EVEN I WOULD NOT CONFUSE A LACK
OF. I WISH CASP POPPED. I WISH
THOSE SCORES LOOKED SO MUCH
BETTER. I WOULD NOT CONFUSE THE
LACK OF GAINS AS LOCAL CONTROL
ISN'T WORKING, AND I THINK I
WOULD JUST ALSO SAY IF WE WANT A
POWERFUL LCAP. LCAP IS BEING
DILUTED BY OTHER PLANS. OUR
FOLKS HAVE MINIMAL BANDWIDTH AND
IF WE WANT LCAP TO GET TO THE
DOCUMENT, THAT IS STRATEGIC
PLANNING AND CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT AND COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT WE HAVE, THERE'S
MINIMUM BANDWIDTH. AND IF WE ARE
DOING OTHER PLANS THAT FEEL VERY
CATEGORICAL, LCAP WILL BECOME
MORE AND MORE COMPLIANCE AND
LESS AND LESS OF AN ACTUAL
IMPACT DOCUMENT. RIGHT. THANK
YOU. I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU.
YOU ALL CONTRIBUTED SO MUCH TO
TODAY'S CONVERSATION. REALLY,
REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR
TIME. AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO
STICK AROUND FOR THE SECOND
HALF. WE ARE GOING TO OBVIOUSLY
NOT END BY ONE AS WAS SCHEDULED
IN THE AGENDA. WE WILL CONTINUE
TO GO ON FOR ISSUE NUMBER THREE
AND FOUR WITH BOTH OF THOSE
PANELS, BUT I AM GOING TO TAKE
JUST A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. WE'VE
BEEN SITTING HERE NOW FOR ALMOST
THREE HOURS. SO JUST A BREAK FOR
US AND WE'LL BE BACK IN FIVE
MINUTES. THANK YOU ALL. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
I PROMISE I KNOW ROBERT RIVAS
YES.
I. THE ONE THING THAT.
I. MENTIONED.
ABOUT.
SENATOR-FULLER-OPPOSES-CHANGES-OHV-PROGRAM.
THAT I THOUGHT WAS. I THINK A
WHOLE.
GOING DOWN. GOING DOWN. I HAVE A
YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT I
COULD HAVE. SAID. I THOUGHT IT
WAS A LITTLE BEHIND AND I DON'T
KNOW WHAT I. CARLGUARDINO. I
JUST KIND MOYAMOYA RAFEAL. I
JUST, I HAVE. TO I HAVE OVER.
500 OR 35,000 PEOPLE. WELL. SO
THAT. I.
THAT I HAVE ANYONE ELSE TO STACK.
ANY WAY TO KEEP IT? I DON'T NEED
A STACK. BUT WE WILL RESPOND TO
YOUR QUESTION. WHAT DOES THAT
MEAN? OH, THANK YOU. I DIDN'T GO
FAR. 25 YEARS OLD, AND I KNOW I
KNOW. THAT WHEN I WOULD HAVE
SAID IT, YOU WOULD ASK ABOUT MY
SHORT TERM. Þ. I. I KNOW, I KNOW
EXACTLY. I'M GLAD YOU DIDN'T
HAVE IT. THAT WAS. THANK YOU.
RIGHT.
DÍAS. THANK YOU. REALLY? NO. I
DON'T WANT ANY MORE COUNCIL.
FIREWORKS. I YOU KNOW, THE
PRESIDENT. I LEGISLATURA.
IT'S REALLY HARD TO PART THE
FIRE AND I DON'T I DON'T I DON'T
THINK SO. I'M JULIAN. ALL RIGHT.
GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. THANK
YOU FOR GIVING US A CHANCE TO
TAKE A LITTLE RECESS. BUT WE ARE
COMING RIGHT BACK ON TO OUR
THIRD AND FOURTH PANELS AGAIN.
THIS IS THE ASSEMBLY BUDGET
SUBCOMMITTEE NUMBER THREE ON
EDUCATION, FINANCE AND THE
ASSEMBLY EDUCATION COMMITTEE
WITH OUR JOINT OVERSIGHT HEARING
ON CALIFORNIA LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA. FISCAL DESIGN
AND OUTCOMES OVERSIGHT. SO THIS
PANEL, WHICH I THINK WE WILL
TAKE THE SAME APPROACH THAT WE
DID WITH THE FIRST AND SECOND
PANEL. WE WILL DO PANEL THREE
AND PANEL FOUR, AND THEN WE'LL
HAVE QUESTIONS. AS YOU SAW WAS
VERY DYNAMIC AND ROBUST
CONVERSATION WITH MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. SO ON THIS PARTICULAR
PANEL, WHICH IS TITLED ACHIEVING
EQUITY LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
DESIGN AND OUTCOMES, THIS ISSUE
WILL STUDY THE LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT DESIGN PRINCIPLES, CURRENT
SYSTEM, AND STUDENT OUTCOMES
FROM THIS COMPONENT OF THE
FORMULA AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO
IMPROVE THESE OUTCOMES, I'D ASK
ALL OF YOU, AS YOU HEARD, THE
PREVIOUS PANELS, TO TRY AND NOT
REPEAT WHAT WAS ALREADY SAID,
BUT BUILD UP, BUILD OFF OF EACH
OTHER. IT WILL HELP US CREATE A
MORE, AGAIN ROBUST CONVERSATION.
SO I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR
YOUR PATIENCE AND FOR BEING
HERE. AND WE'LL START WITH
JULIAN LA FORTUNE WITH THE
PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF
CALIFORNIA. WELCOME. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. PANEL. THANK YOU,
ASSEMBLY MEMBERS. CHAIR I'M
REALLY THRILLED TO BE ABLE TO
PRESENT AND TALK ABOUT SOME OF
OUR RESEARCH HERE TODAY. SO JUST
A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND. MY
NAME IS JULIAN LA FORTUNE. I'M A
SENIOR FELLOW AT THE PUBLIC
POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA,
AND WE'VE BEEN STUDYING LCFF FOR
SEVERAL YEARS NOW, LOOKING AT A
LOT OF THE FISCAL DESIGN
ELEMENTS AS WELL AS THE IMPACTS.
AND I THINK THE PANEL'S BEFORE
ME HAVE REALLY APPROPRIATELY SET
THE STAGE. LCFF WAS A
TRANSFORMATIONAL SHIFT, A
STRONGER EQUITY FOCUS, A GREATER
FLEXIBILITY FOCUS TO CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL FINANCE AND RESEARCH HAS
DOCUMENTED ACADEMIC GAINS FROM
THESE SHIFTS, BUT STUDENT
ACHIEVEMENT IS STILL FAR BELOW
OUR EXPECTATIONS. STUBBORN GAPS
BY RACE AND INCOME PERSIST. NOW,
OVER A DECADE LATER, IT'S WORTH
CONSIDERING WHAT WORKS AND WHAT
COULD WORK BETTER. THERE ARE
THREE BROAD POINTS I WISH TO
MAKE. FIRST, THE EVIDENCE OF
IMPACT IS STRONGER FOR DISTRICT
THAN STUDENT LEVEL GAPS. SO FROM
2015 TO 2019, PRE-PANDEMIC, THE
ELA PROFICIENCY GAP BETWEEN LOW
INCOME AND HIGHER INCOME
STUDENTS FELL BY ABOUT 2.5
PERCENTAGE POINTS, OR 8%. BUT
THE GAP BETWEEN LOWER AND HIGHER
INCOME DISTRICTS FELL BY MORE
SIX PERCENTAGE POINTS, OR 15%,
AND THIS UNDERLIES THE CRUX OF
MY REMARKS. WE HAVE A FORMULA
THAT TARGETS DISTRICTS AND
DISTRICT NEED THE IMPACT OF
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION.
FUNDING IS MOST CLEAR WHEN WE
COMPARE DISTRICTS, AND LESS SO
WHEN WE COMPARE STUDENT GROUPS.
WHICH BRINGS ME TO MY SECOND
POINT HOW FUNDING IS TARGETED TO
SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS MATTERS. A
SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF
SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING APPEARS TO
BE SPENT BROADLY LIKE BASE
FUNDING. AS A RESULT,
DEMOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES ACROSS
AND WITHIN DISTRICTS FLATTEN THE
EQUITY IMPACT OF THE FORMULA.
LET ME OUTLINE THIS WITH A BRIEF
HYPOTHETICAL. SUPPOSE WE GIVE
EVERY DISTRICT $10,000 OF BASE
FUNDING. THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
THEN YIELDS $2,000 FOR HIGH NEED
STUDENTS. IF DISTRICTS FULLY
TARGET THESE FUNDS. THIS IS LIKE
PUTTING AN EXTRA $2,000 IN THE
BACKPACK OF EVERY HIGH NEED
STUDENT IN THE STATE, SO TO SAY.
BUT IF DISTRICTS SPEND EQUALLY
ACROSS STUDENTS, THIS YIELDS
ABOUT A $1,400 INCREASE FOR HIGH
NEED STUDENTS AND A $1,000
INCREASE FOR OTHER STUDENTS. IN
OTHER WORDS, WITHOUT TARGETING,
THE RELATIVE GAIN FOR HIGH NEED
STUDENTS IS ONLY $400 INSTEAD OF
2,080% REDUCTION. NOW, ABOUT 17%
OF LOW INCOME, 20% OF ELL
STUDENTS ARE IN NON
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS. MORE
THAN HALF OF HIGH NEED STUDENTS
ARE IN DISTRICTS WITH LESS THAN
80% NEED, WHICH RECEIVE MORE
SUPPLEMENTAL THAN CONCENTRATION
FUNDS. WE ALSO SEE THIS BY
SCHOOL. OVER 20% OF SCHOOL SITES
AND DISTRICTS WITH MODERATE NEED
BETWEEN 30 TO 55% HIGH NEED
COULD BE CONSIDERED
CONCENTRATION. SCHOOLS WITH 55%
OR GREATER HIGH NEED. THUS, THE
ULTIMATE IMPACT OF THE FORMULA
DEPENDS EFFECTIVELY ON HOW
DISTRICTS TARGET DOLLARS. AND
YET OUR RESEARCH DOCUMENTS THAT
THERE IS INCOMPLETE TARGETING.
SO ON AVERAGE, STATEWIDE, FOR
EVERY DOLLAR A SCHOOL GENERATES
IN HIGH NEED FUNDING SPENDING IS
ONLY 60 $0.63 HIGHER THAN AT
OTHER SCHOOLS IN THE SAME
DISTRICT, WITH THE REST BEING
SPREAD MORE EQUALLY. DISTRICT
WIDE. AND THAT BRINGS ME TO THE
THIRD POINT. WHO WE CHOOSE TO
TARGET MATTERS. SO IN
FORTHCOMING WORK WE HAVE SET TO
RELEASE NEXT MONTH, WE EXAMINE
HIGH NEED DEFINITIONS AND
IMPLICATIONS. FREE OR REDUCED
PRICE MEAL RATES OR RPM HAVE
DIVERGED FROM STATEWIDE INCOME
AND POVERTY MEASURES. MANY
STATES HAVE MOVED AWAY FROM RPM
IN THEIR FUNDING FORMULAS AND
UNIVERSAL SCHOOL MEALS FURTHER
COMPLICATES THIS MEASURE, AND
MOTIVATES CONSIDERING A SHIFT.
NOW, THE SOCIOECONOMICS OF
DISTRICTS WITH SIMILAR RPM CAN
VARY BECAUSE IT'S A COARSE
MEASURE. CONSIDER TWO ACTUAL
DISTRICTS ABOUT 30 MILES APART
IN THE SAME COUNTY. BOTH HAVE
SIMILAR RPM. DISTRICT A HAS 69%,
DISTRICT B HAS 67%. HOWEVER,
DISTRICT B HAS NEARLY HALF THE
POVERTY RATE AND 50% HIGHER
HOUSEHOLD INCOMES, AND YET THE
FORMULA DOES NOT REFLECT THESE
DIFFERENCES. WITH LESS THAN A 3%
DIFFERENCE IN PER STUDENT LCFF
FUNDING BETWEEN THEM. ONE FINAL
POINT ON THE WHO, UNLIKE
CALIFORNIA, MANY STATES FUND
MULTIPLE CATEGORIES OF NEED IN A
DUPLICATED RATHER THAN AN
UNDUPLICATED MANNER. FOR
EXAMPLE, LOW INCOME ELL STUDENTS
RECEIVE FUNDING FOR BOTH
SOCIOECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE AND
THEIR ELL SUPPORTS. OUR
FORTHCOMING RESEARCH SHOWS THAT
DUPLICATED COUNTS WILL BETTER
REFLECT NEED AND WOULD IMPROVE
FUNDING EQUITY. NOW, OF COURSE,
CHANGES ARE NOT SIMPLE AND COULD
CREATE WINNERS AND LOSERS ABSENT
NEW REVENUES. IN PART FOR THIS
REASON, MANY ARGUE WE MUST FIRST
ENSURE ADEQUATE FUNDING AS A
BASELINE. OF COURSE, THIS IS A
NECESSARY STEP. YET EFFORTS TO
IMPROVE EQUITY ARE WORTH
CONSIDERING EVEN IN THE ABSENCE
OF NEW FUNDING. OUR RESEARCH
SUGGESTS THAT BETTER TARGETING
AND GREATER TRANSPARENCY ARE
IMPORTANT PLACES TO START TO
ENSURE THAT CURRENT SUPPLEMENTAL
DOLLARS ARE INDEED REACHING THE
HIGH NEEDS STUDENTS FOR WHOM
THEY'RE INTENDED. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE
THAT. MOVING ON TO OUR NEXT
PANELIST, WHICH IS KARI HANEL
FROM BELLWETHER RESEARCH AND
PACE. YES. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIRS. THANK YOU FOR HOSTING
THIS HEARING TODAY. MY NAME IS
CARRIE HANEL AND I AM A SENIOR
FELLOW WITH PACE, WHICH IS A
NONPARTISAN RESEARCH CENTER
SUPPORTED BY FACULTY DIRECTORS
AT FIVE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITIES.
I AM ALSO A SENIOR ASSOCIATE
PARTNER AT BELLWETHER, WHICH IS
A NATIONAL NONPROFIT THAT
FOCUSES ON EDUCATIONAL EQUITY
WITH A DEEP SCHOOL FINANCE
PRACTICE AREA. IN THESE ROLES,
I'VE CONDUCTED EXTENSIVE
RESEARCH ON SCHOOL FUNDING
SYSTEMS, BOTH IN CALIFORNIA AND
IN OTHER STATES AROUND THE
COUNTRY, AND MY INVOLVEMENT WITH
LCFF DATES BACK TO 2011, WHEN,
AS PART OF THE LCFF EQUITY
COALITION IN MINERAL TRUST WEST,
I ADVOCATED FOR AND OVERSAW THE
SOME OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND
MONITORING OF THE NEW FUNDING
REFORM. I'D LIKE TO START BY
JUST COMMENTING ON SOME OF THE
STRENGTHS THAT WE'VE TALKED
ABOUT. THANKS TO LCFF,
CALIFORNIA DOES HAVE ONE OF THE
MOST PROGRESSIVE FUNDING SYSTEMS
IN THE COUNTRY. BY DIRECTING
MORE RESOURCES TO DISTRICTS WITH
HIGHER NUMBERS AND
CONCENTRATIONS OF LOW INCOME AND
ELL STUDENTS, THE STATE HAS MADE
A MAJOR POSITIVE STEP TOWARD
SUPPORTING THE EDUCATIONAL
SUCCESS OF CALIFORNIA'S MOST
VULNERABLE STUDENTS. THE FORMULA
IS ALSO RELATIVELY SIMPLE,
TRANSPARENT, AND EASY FOR
EDUCATION STAKEHOLDERS TO
UNDERSTAND. AND AS OTHERS HAVE
SHARED, THERE'S EVIDENCE TO
SUGGEST THAT IT'S WORKING. THE
FUNDING FORMULA IN MANY WAYS HAS
SERVED AS A TEMPLATE FOR FUNDING
REFORMS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. WE
SEE STATES BUILDING UPON AND
REFINING IN MANY WAYS, WHAT LCFF
HAS ACCOMPLISHED IN CALIFORNIA.
BUT THERE HAVE BEEN SOME
CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTATION
THAT POINT TO OPPORTUNITIES FOR
IMPROVEMENT, WHICH I'LL ADDRESS
THE FIRST CHALLENGE IS THAT
WHILE THE STATE FUNDING
DISTRIBUTION IS EQUITABLE, THE
PER PUPIL SPENDING AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL DOESN'T ALWAYS REFLECT THE
SAME PATTERN. WHEN PACE LOOKED
AT 1920 EXPENDITURES, WE FOUND
THAT DISTRICTS BETWEEN THE ZERO
AND 20% UNDUPLICATED THRESHOLD
SPENT ABOUT THE SAME AS SAME PER
PUPIL AS DISTRICTS BETWEEN THE
80 AND 100% THRESHOLD. SO THE
HIGHEST AND LOWEST POVERTY
SCHOOL DISTRICTS WERE SPENDING
ABOUT THE SAME PER PUPIL. AND
THEN IN BETWEEN THERE WAS A
TROUGH IN SPENDING FOR DISTRICTS
WITH ABOUT 20 TO 55%
UNDUPLICATED. THE CONCENTRATION
GRANTS HAVE SINCE INCREASED IN
SIZE, AND THE STATE HAS
IMPLEMENTED THE EQUITY
MULTIPLIER. AND IT'S TRUE THAT
THESE FUNDING REFORMS MIGHT HELP
BOOST SPENDING FOR THE HIGHEST
POVERTY DISTRICTS, BUT THEY ARE
LIKELY TO DO LITTLE TO ADDRESS
THOSE DISTRICTS IN THE MIDDLE.
THE RELATIVELY FLAT SPENDING
THAT WE'VE SEEN IS LIKELY DUE TO
A MIX OF FACTORS, BUT I'LL NAME
THREE OF THEM. FIRST, LOW
POVERTY DISTRICTS TEND TO BE
MORE SUCCESSFUL IN RAISING
ADDITIONAL LOCAL REVENUES
THROUGH SOURCES LIKE PARCEL
TAXES, AND THEY'RE MORE LIKELY
TO BE BASIC AID. SO RETAINING
EXCESS PROPERTY TAX WEALTH.
SECOND, MIDDLE POVERTY DISTRICTS
ARE LESS LIKELY TO RECEIVE
SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL FUNDS LIKE
TITLE ONE AND THIRD, BECAUSE
HIGH POVERTY DISTRICTS HAVE
HIGHER ABSENTEEISM, THEY SUFFER
A LARGER FISCAL PENALTY UNDER
THE ADA BASED FUNDING FORMULA,
AND TOGETHER, THESE PATTERNS
SUGGEST THAT THE LCFF
SUPPLEMENTAL WEIGHTS MIGHT NOT
BE LARGE ENOUGH TO OFFSET THESE
OTHER FISCAL INEQUITIES. TO
ADDRESS THIS, THE STATE COULD
INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT. IT COULD
SWITCH FROM AN ADA TO AN
ENROLLMENT BASED FUNDING
FORMULA, LIKE VIRTUALLY EVERY
OTHER STATE HAS. OR IT COULD
COMBINE THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANTS INTO A
SINGLE GRANT THAT MORE SMOOTHLY
GROWS IN PROPORTION TO THE
CONCENTRATION OF UNDUPLICATED
STUDENTS AND ELIMINATES THE
DISCONTINUITY THAT EARLIER PANEL
TALKED ABOUT AT THE 55%
THRESHOLD TO PAY FOR THIS, THE
STATE COULD PHASE OUT LEGACY
PROGRAMS LIKE TIG, ECONOMIC
RECOVERY TARGET AND MSA. THESE
ADD ON PROGRAMS CONFLICT WITH
THE EQUITY AND COHERENCE GOALS
OF LCFF. IT COULD ALSO CAPTURE
SOME OF THE SAVINGS FROM
DECLINING ENROLLMENT. AS THE
EARLIER PANEL DISCUSSED. THE
NEXT CHALLENGE THAT I WANT TO
ADDRESS IS THAT THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT PROVIDES THE SAME FUNDING
WEIGHT TO UNDUPLICATED STUDENTS,
REGARDLESS OF DIFFERENCES IN
NEEDS. WHILE THE SIMPLICITY IS A
STRENGTH OF THE FUNDING FORMULA
THAT WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO HOLD
ON TO, AND IN MANY WAYS, IT'S
ALSO A SHORTCOMING SINCE
DISTRICTS SERVING STUDENTS WITH
MULTIPLE OR GREATER RISK FACTORS
DO NEED MORE RESOURCES TO HELP
THOSE STUDENTS SUCCEED. FOR
EXAMPLE, ELLS WHO ARE AT LOW WHO
ARE LOW INCOME REQUIRE GREATER
SUPPORTS THAN ELLS WHO ARE MORE
AFFLUENT. LONG TERM ELLS REQUIRE
DIFFERENT SUPPORT THAN
NEWCOMERS, AND FOSTER YOUTH FACE
ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES AS
COMPARED WITH OTHER ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. SOME
OTHER STATES AND I'LL JUST NAME
TENNESSEE AS ONE EXAMPLE, HAVE
ADOPTED FUNDING FORMULAS THAT DO
PROVIDE DUPLICATED WEIGHTS AND
ALSO THAT HAVE LARGER WEIGHTS
FOR STUDENTS WHO HAVE MORE ACUTE
NEEDS, INCLUDING DIFFERENTIATION
FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS. AND THE
FINAL ISSUE I WANT TO NAME WHICH
ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES ALSO
ADDRESSED IS THE FREE AND
REDUCED PRICE MEALS INDICATOR IN
THE SYSTEM. THE MEASURE HAS MANY
SHORTCOMINGS. EVEN BEFORE RECENT
POLICY CHANGES. THE FREE OR
REDUCED PRICE LUNCH MEASURE DID
NOT ACCURATELY CAPTURE STUDENT
ECONOMIC DISADVANTAGE. AND NOW
THAT CALIFORNIA PROVIDES FREE
MEALS TO ALL STUDENTS REGARDLESS
OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME, FAMILIES
HAVE LESS INCENTIVE TO COMPLETE
THOSE ENROLLMENT FORMS. IT
FURTHER ERODES THE USEFULNESS OF
THAT MEASURE. RESEARCHERS HAVE
FOUND THAT OTHER MEASURES LIKE
SNAP PARTICIPATION, FOR EXAMPLE,
ARE MORE EFFECTIVE IN
DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN SCHOOLS
WITH MODERATELY HIGH AND EXTREME
LEVELS OF POVERTY. AND WITH
THAT, I'LL JUST SAY THESE ARE
THE THREE SUGGESTIONS THAT WE
MADE. HAPPY TO DIG INTO THOSE
FURTHER AND APPRECIATE YOUR
ATTENTION TODAY. THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE ON TO JONATHAN KAPLAN
WITH THE LEARNING POLICY
INSTITUTE. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. CHAIRS ALVAREZ AND
MURATSUCHI AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEES. THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR
BEFORE YOU TODAY. MY NAME IS
JONATHAN KAPLAN. I'M A SENIOR
POLICY RESEARCHER AND ADVISOR AT
THE LEARNING POLICY INSTITUTE,
AN ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO
ADVANCING EVIDENCE BASED,
EVIDENCE BASED POLICIES IN
EDUCATION TO ENSURE EQUITABLE
LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL
CHILDREN. I'M FOCUSING ON THE
LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT AND HOW
IT CENTERED THE PRINCIPLE OF
EQUITY IN CALIFORNIA'S EDUCATION
FINANCE SYSTEM, AS WELL AS
OPTIONS FOR ADDRESSING THE
CHALLENGES IN ITS FISCAL DESIGN
TO START, THE CALIFORNIA
LEGISLATURE DESERVES MUCH CREDIT
FOR CREATION OF THE LCFF
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT BECAUSE IT
DID CENTER EQUITY IN THE
SUPPLEMENTAL IN THE FINANCE
SYSTEM, INCLUDING INCLUDING
FOCUSING ON THE ISSUE OF THE
MONEY. ACTUALLY DOES MATTER, AND
THAT MONEY DEDICATED FOR
STUDENTS WITH ADDITIONAL NEEDS
IS CRUCIAL AS A RESULT OF
INCLUDING THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
IN THE FISCAL DESIGN OF THE
LCFF, WE HAVE FINDINGS THAT
WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT TODAY
FROM PROFESSOR JOHNSON AND
OTHERS THAT SHOW THAT LCFF
INDUCED INCREASES IN PER PUPIL
SPENDING HAVE IMPROVED STUDENT
OUTCOMES IN MATH AND READING,
REDUCE THE PROBABILITY OF GRADE
REPETITION, INCREASE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF HIGH SCHOOL
GRADUATION AND COLLEGE
READINESS, AND DECREASE
SUSPENSIONS AND EXPULSIONS. SO
WE KNOW THAT BY USING MULTIPLE
YEARS OF DATA, WE CAN SEE THAT
THE EVIDENCE THAT THE LCFF HAS
ACTUALLY HAD AN INCREASE. THE
LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT HAS
HELPED ACHIEVE STUDENT OUTCOMES.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE CHALLENGES
PRESENTED BY THE FISCAL DESIGN
OF THE LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT.
MANY OF WHICH HAVE BEEN
DISCUSSED TODAY. ONE QUESTION
REALLY THAT'S COME TO THE CENTER
IS WHETHER THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT ITSELF IS ADEQUATE TO
ACHIEVE DESIRED OUTCOMES. A SOON
TO BE PUBLISHED REPORT BY MY
COLLEAGUES AT THE LEARNING
POLICY INSTITUTE INCLUDE A
REVIEW OF ADEQUACY STUDIES
CONDUCTED IN FIVE STATES BETWEEN
2016 AND 2023, WHICH SHOWS THAT
THE LCFF 20% SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
IS AT THE LOWER END OF THE RANGE
OF WEIGHTS RECOMMENDED FOR
ENGLISH LEARNERS, AND BELOW THE
LOWEST RECOMMENDED WEIGHT FOR AT
RISK STUDENTS, WHICH IS MOST
OFTEN DEFINED BY A MEASURE OF
FAMILY INCOME. ANALYSIS OF THOSE
ADEQUACY STUDIES FOUND THAT
THESE WEIGHTS TRANSLATED INTO
ADDITIONAL PER PUPIL FUNDING OF
NEARLY $6,500 IN WASHINGTON,
D.C, AND MORE THAN $9,900 IN
DELAWARE AND MARYLAND. THE SAME
ANALYSIS ESTIMATED THAT
CALIFORNIA'S 20% SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT WEIGHT TRANSLATED INTO
ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF $2,100 PER
STUDENT, WHICH IS PROVIDED TO
SCHOOL DISTRICTS. AS MANY HAVE
DISCUSSED ON AN UNDUPLICATED
COUNT OF BOTH STUDENT GROUPS,
THIS MEANS THAT THE LEVEL OF
FUNDING PROVIDED BY CALIFORNIA'S
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FALLS WELL
BELOW THE ADEQUACY LEVELS
RECOMMENDED FOR THESE OTHER
STATES. HOW DOES THAT HOW DOES
THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT ACTUALLY
COMPARE TO WHAT STATES PROVIDE
IN ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
ENGLISH LEARNERS AND STUDENTS
FROM LOW INCOME FAMILIES? THE
FORTHCOMING REPORT BY MY
COLLEAGUES AT MY COLLEAGUES AT
LPI SHOWS THAT CALIFORNIA'S 20%
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT IS AT THE
LOWER END OF THE RANGE OF STATES
THAT USE A SINGLE GRANT WEIGHT
FOR EITHER ENGLISH LEARNERS OR
AT RISK STUDENTS. MOREOVER, OF
THE 42 STATES THAT PROVIDE
FUNDING FOR BOTH ENGLISH
LEARNERS AND AT RISK STUDENTS,
CALIFORNIA IS ONLY ONE OF SIX
STATES THAT PROVIDES FUNDING
BASED ON THE UNDUPLICATED COUNT
OF BOTH OF THESE STUDENTS
GROUPS. THIS POINTS TO A
SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE THAT HAS
BEEN NOTED MANY TIMES HERE.
STUDENTS WHO HAVE MULTIPLE NEEDS
DO NOT GENERATE MULTIPLE GRANTS
IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT. THE
USE OF UNDUPLICATED COUNTS IS
THE BASIS FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT FAILS TO RECOGNIZE THAT
STUDENTS THAT GENERATE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS ARE DIVERSE
AND HAVE DISTINCT NEEDS FOR
ACHIEVING DESIRED OUTCOMES. YET
THE LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT DOES
NOT RECOGNIZE THOSE DISTINCT
NEEDS, NOR DOES IT RECOGNIZE
THAT STUDENTS THAT HAVE MULTIPLE
NEEDS OFTEN FACE MULTIPLE
CHALLENGES. WHAT OPTIONS COULD
BE EMPLOYED TO IMPROVE THE
FISCAL DESIGN OF THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT? ONE OPTION
FOR IMPROVING THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT IS TO INCREASE ITS WEIGHT.
THIS COULD IMPROVE THE ADEQUACY
OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT, AND A
SECOND OPTION WOULD BE TO
CALCULATE THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
BASED ON DUPLICATED COUNTS OF
STUDENTS TARGETED FOR ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT, WHICH WOULD IMPROVE
EQUITY AS WELL AS ADEQUACY BY
RECOGNIZING THEIR COMPOUNDED
NEEDS. LASTLY, RECOGNIZING
STUDENT GROUPS WITH ADDITIONAL
NEEDS NOT CURRENTLY TARGETED TO
RECEIVE ADDITIONAL FUNDING WOULD
BOTH IMPROVE ADEQUACY AND EQUITY
IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT. FOR
EXAMPLE, THE LCFF SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT DOES NOT SPECIFY IDENTIFY
SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY STUDENTS
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AS A
GROUP THAT HAVE ADDITIONAL
RESOURCE NEEDS. WHILE MOST
HOMELESS YOUTH ARE SUBSUMED
WITHIN THE CATEGORY OF STUDENTS
FROM LOW INCOME FAMILIES, THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT MAY NOT BE
PROVIDING THE LEVEL OF SUPPORT
THAT THESE STUDENTS NEED TO
ACHIEVE DESIRED OUTCOMES. THANKS
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
WITH YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO
HAVING ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY
HAVE. THANK YOU AND THANKS AGAIN
FOR THE MATERIAL PROVIDED AHEAD
OF TIME. NATALIE WESTFALL LU█N
WITH EDITOR TRUSS WEST. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMITTEE
MEMBERS. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO
JOIN MY FELLOW PANELISTS IN
THANKING CHAIRS ALVAREZ AND
MURATSUCHI FOR HOLDING THIS
REALLY IMPORTANT HEARING AS WE
RAISE THE DEAD. TRUST WEST IN
OUR REPORT ENTITLED MORE TO BE
DONE THAT WE RELEASED LAST
NOVEMBER. WE BELIEVE THAT THE
LEGISLATURE HAS A CRITICAL ROLE
TO PLAY IN ENSURING THAT LCFF IS
SUCCESSFUL. IN CLOSING LONG
STANDING GAPS IN ACADEMIC
OUTCOMES EXPERIENCED BY STUDENTS
OF COLOR AND MULTILINGUAL
LEARNERS IN CALIFORNIA, AND
HOLDING THESE TYPES OF OVERSIGHT
HEARINGS IS THE FIRST STEP IN
MAKING SURE WE'RE ADDRESSING
THOSE ISSUES. I CERTAINLY AGREE
WITH WHAT OTHERS HAVE SHARED IN
TERMS OF LCF'S MONUMENTAL IMPACT
ON THE POSITIVE DIRECTION THAT
WE'VE GONE IN CALIFORNIA IN
ADDRESSING THE PERPETUAL
INEQUITIES, BOTH IN RESOURCES
AND OUTCOMES THAT NEGATIVELY
IMPACT STUDENTS OF COLOR,
STUDENTS IN POVERTY AND
MULTILINGUAL LEARNERS IN
CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS. HOWEVER, WE
SEE THAT THESE GAPS IN OUTCOMES
THAT HAVE PERPETUATED SINCE
LCF'S PASSAGE, WE SEE THAT THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT HAS
INSUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED THOSE
ACADEMIC OUTCOME INEQUITIES.
THERE HAVE BEEN VERY SLOW GAINS,
IN PARTICULAR FOR BLACK AND
BROWN STUDENTS IN CALIFORNIA
OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS. AND IF
WE REMAIN ON THIS SAME
TRAJECTORY, LATINX STUDENTS
WON'T ALL BE AT GRADE LEVEL IN
MATH UNTIL THE YEAR 2060. AND
THEY WON'T ALL BE AT GRADE LEVEL
IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS UNTIL
2046. FOR BLACK STUDENTS, THEY
WON'T ALL BE AT GRADE LEVEL IN
MATH UNTIL 2089, AND THEY WON'T
ALL BE AT GRADE LEVEL IN ENGLISH
LANGUAGE ARTS UNTIL 2071. AND IN
THESE ASSESSMENTS, WE TOOK INTO
ACCOUNT PRE-PANDEMIC OUTCOMES
INFORMATION NOT EVEN FACTORING
IN THE DIP IN CAF SCORES AFTER
THE PANDEMIC. SO I SHARE THAT
JUST TO REINFORCE THE URGENCY
THAT WE HAVE IN INCORPORATING
RACE AND THINKING ABOUT RACE, AS
WE'RE THINKING ABOUT THE
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT AND IN SO
DOING, I FULLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT BARRIERS
TO ADDRESSING RACE DIRECTLY
WITHIN THE FUNDING FORMULA
ITSELF FROM PROP 209. AND THERE
ARE CONCERNS ABOUT THE POTENTIAL
IMPACT OF UNFAVORABLE SUPREME
COURT DECISIONS THAT WOULD
POTENTIALLY LIMIT THE ABILITY TO
TAKE RACE INTO ACCOUNT. IN
THINKING ABOUT THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT. HOWEVER, AS OTHER FOLKS
HAVE SHARED ON THIS PANEL AND IN
PREVIOUS PANELS, THERE IS A
SIGNIFICANT NEED TO ADDRESS THE
INADEQUACY OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT IN THE COST THAT IT DOES
TAKE TO EDUCATE THE STUDENTS IN
OUR SYSTEM, AND A LOT OF THOSE
COSTS COME FROM THE SYSTEMIC
DISPARITIES THAT STUDENT GROUPS
EXPERIENCE BASED ON RACE. AND
THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO LOOK AT
MYRIAD TYPES OF DATA TO PRESENT
AS COST FACTORS THAT WE SHOULD
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IN ALLOCATING
THOSE RESOURCES. WE CAN LOOK AT
THINGS LIKE EDUCATIONAL
ATTAINMENT OF PARENTS, RATES OF
HOME OWNERSHIP BY NEIGHBORHOOD,
RATES OF SYSTEM INVOLVEMENT,
CHRONIC ILLNESS, AND SOME OF
THESE SIMILAR TYPES OF MARKERS
OF NEED HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED
IN THINGS LIKE THE STUDENT
EQUITY NEEDS INDEX IN LOS
ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
WHICH IN WHICH THEY USE AS
LEVELS OF ASTHMA CASES BY
NEIGHBORHOOD COVID CASES,
INSTANCES OF GUN VIOLENCE, ETC.
AND I THINK THAT THESE TYPES OF
MEASURES WOULD SIGNAL THAT
DISTRICTS AND SCHOOLS WOULD NEED
TO PAY CLOSER ATTENTION TO THESE
TYPES OF FACTORS AS THEY'RE
SERVING STUDENTS. AND THAT WOULD
BE AN ADDED BENEFIT TO THE POINT
THAT ASSEMBLY MEMBER ALVAREZ
RAISED AROUND THE NEED TO HAVE
LCFF REFLECT OUR VALUES. THIS
WOULD INCORPORATE THE VALUES OF
ADDRESSING THE SYSTEMIC
DISPARITIES BECAUSE OF SYSTEMIC
RACISM WITHIN THE FORMULA
ITSELF, AS WELL AS PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES. AND IN
ADDITION TO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT
THESE ADDITIONAL MARKERS OF
DISPARITY, WE AGREE WITH WHAT
OTHER FOLKS HAVE SHARED. SO I
WON'T GO INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL
THAT THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT
BENEFITS TO BE HAD TO ALLOCATING
AND CALCULATING THE SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT AT THE SCHOOL SITE LEVEL,
BOTH TO MAKE SURE THAT THE
DOLLARS ARE MORE CLOSELY
FOLLOWING THE STUDENTS WHO
GENERATE THEM, BUT ALSO TO
CREATE ADDITIONAL TRANSPARENCY
THAT COMMUNITIES NEED TO
UNDERSTAND HOW THEIR SCHOOLS ARE
USING DOLLARS TO BENEFIT
STUDENTS THAT ARE HAVE
SIGNIFICANT LEVELS OF NEED. AND
WITH THAT, I WILL CONCLUDE MY
REMARKS AND THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR HAVING US JOIN YOU TODAY.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
APPRECIATE YOU. AND FROM THE SAN
YSIDRO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DISTRICT, WE HAVE DOCTOR GINA
POTTER. WELCOME. GOOD AFTERNOON.
CHAIRS ALVAREZ AND MURATSUCHI.
IT'S TRULY AN HONOR TO BE HERE
TODAY. MY NAME IS DOCTOR GINA
POTTER, AND I'M THE
SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE SAN
YSIDRO SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND I
ALSO SERVE AS A COUNCIL ADVISORY
MEMBER TO THE CALIFORNIA
COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATIONAL
EXCELLENCE. AND FINALLY, I'VE
HAD THE HONOR TO SERVE 20 YEARS
AS A LEADER FOR ACSA, AS THE
CURRENT VICE PRESIDENT FOR
LEGISLATIVE MATTERS. SO OUR
SCHOOL DISTRICT SERVES ONE OF
THE MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS
OF CHILDREN IN THE ENTIRE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. WE ARE A
CULTURALLY VIBRANT COMMUNITY,
AND WE ARE LOCATED JUST NORTH OF
THE MEXICAN BORDER AND THE SAN
YSIDRO PORT OF ENTRY. WE SERVE
ALMOST 4500 AMAZING STUDENTS
PRESCHOOL TO EIGHTH GRADE. AND
OF THOSE STUDENTS, WE HAVE, 57%
ARE ENGLISH LEARNERS, OF WHICH
WE HAVE 18 LANGUAGES. WE HAVE
24% OR ONE OF THE HIGHEST
POPULATION OF UNHOUSED OR
HOMELESS STUDENTS IN THE ENTIRE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THAT'S 1 IN
4 OF OUR STUDENTS. WE HAVE 75%
WHO ARE SOCIOECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED, AND 14% OF OUR
STUDENTS ARE STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES. AS A FORMER CEO OR
CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICIAL FOR 13
YEARS IN A DIFFERENT DISTRICT,
AND THE FORMER CHAIR OF 42
SCHOOL DISTRICT CBOS IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I HAD THE
HONOR TO SERVE A SCHOOL DISTRICT
DURING THE GREAT RECESSION, AND
I SAY HONOR RATHER THAN
CHALLENGE SO WE CAN BE POSITIVE.
IT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT TIME,
BUT WHAT CAME FROM THE GREAT
RECESSION WAS THE ADVENT OF THE
LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING FORMULA
DURING THE GREAT RECESSION. I
RECALL DISTINCTLY PROPOSITION 98
REDUCING BY ALMOST 30%. I
REMEMBER YEAR OVER YEAR BUDGET
CUTS, SIX YEARS IN A ROW FROM
2007 TO 2012. WE ALL WE DID WERE
BUDGET REDUCTION PLANS. I
REMEMBER A REVENUE LIMIT DEFICIT
FACTOR THAT AT THE HEIGHT OF THE
RECESSION WAS 22%, AND CASH
DEFERRALS OF UP TO 40% OF
INTER-DISTRICT CASH DEFERRALS.
THANKFULLY, HAVING SERVED ON A
STATE TASK FORCE THAT GAVE INPUT
INTO THE CREATION OF THE LCFF
AND THE LCAP FROM 2011 TO 13, I
DISTINCTLY REMEMBER ALL OF A
SUDDEN WE CAME OUT OF THIS CLOUD
OF THE GREAT RECESSION AND
THANKS TO LEADERS LIKE OUR CHAIR
MURATSUCHI, THEY CREATED ONE OF
THE MOST PROGRESSIVE FUNDING
FORMULAS IN EDUCATION ACROSS THE
UNITED STATES, KNOWN AS THE
LCFF. AND THE NATION WAS
INTERESTED IN IT AS WELL AS THEY
WERE CREATING THEIR EVERY
STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT. WITH THAT
SAID, BEFORE THAT WE HAD OVER 40
CATEGORICAL RESTRICTED PROGRAMS.
WE COULD NOT MAKE HEADS FROM
TAILS. AND SO KNOWING THAT WE
WERE ABLE TO MERGE ALL OF THESE
CATEGORICALS AND BRING LOCAL
CONTROL TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND
BRING THESE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANTS WAS TRULY A
BLESSING TO ALL OF THE DISTRICTS
THAT WE REPRESENT IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. AND SO BEGAN THE
LCFF IN 20 1314 AND THE RECOVERY
OF FUNDING TO EDUCATION THAT
TOOK SIX YEARS TO RECOVER FROM
PRE-GREAT RECESSION LEVELS. AND
SO IT TOOK US UNTIL 20 1819 TO
GET BACK TO WHAT WE WERE FUNDING
EDUCATION IN 2000 AND 607. AND
THESE FIGURES ARE ADJUSTED FOR
INFLATION. SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO
NOTE THAT INDEED, THE LCFF WAS A
RECOVERY. WE WERE IN RECOVERY
MODE. WE WEREN'T INTO THE MODE
OF ADEQUACY. FINALLY, I'LL POINT
OUT THAT THE EDSOURCE EDUCATION
LAWCENTER MAKING THE GRADE
RANKINGS RANKED US B FOR EQUITY
RECENTLY. WE'RE NOW RANKED NINTH
IN THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MOST EQUITABLE EDUCATION
FORMULA. AND I THINK WE SHOULD
BE APPLAUDED. AND I THANK YOU
FOR THAT. AND BECAUSE WE ARE THE
FIFTH LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE
WORLD, UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE
FALLING NEAR THE BOTTOM IN K-12
SPENDING IN RELATION TO OUR
CALIFORNIA'S TOTAL WEALTH. AND
THEN THE NEA RANKED US 25TH IN
THE UNITED STATES FOR EDUCATION
FUNDING PER STUDENT. I'M ASKED,
HOW DO YOU SPEND THE LCFF
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
DOLLARS IN YOUR DISTRICT?
BECAUSE OF MY 100 PAGE LCAP,
NOBODY CAN SEEM TO FIND IT. SO I
PLACED IT ON ONE PAGE TO HELP
MAKE THIS A VERY EFFICIENT
HEARING, AND WE SPEND IT IN
REMARKABLE WAYS. SO I THANK YOU
AND I THANK THE LEGISLATURE FOR
THE SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION FUNDS, BECAUSE WE
NOW HAVE IMPLEMENTED A DUAL
LANGUAGE PROGRAM THAT JUST WON
THE GOLDEN BELL FROM THE
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL BOARDS
ASSOCIATION FOR A RAPID
RECLASSIFICATION PROGRAM. WE NOW
HIT A MARK OF 22%, RECLASSIFYING
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN
FIVE YEARS, WHICH NOW OUTPACES
THE ENTIRE STATE'S AVERAGE OF
RECLASSIFYING ENGLISH LANGUAGE
LEARNERS. WE ALSO HAVE A
NATIONALLY RANKED AND AWARD
WINNING SCI FI PROGRAM IN OUR
SCHOOL DISTRICT BECAUSE OF THESE
FUNDS, AND WE ALSO WON ALL OF
THE CLASSROOM OF THE FUTURE
AWARDS FOR OUR SCI FI PROGRAM.
AND ON THE LAST PAGE, YOU CAN
SEE SOME WONDERFUL PHOTOS OF OUR
STUDENTS IN ACTION. LEARNING,
SCIENCE AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION
AND REALLY LEARNING HOW TO MOVE
INTO THESE STEM FIELDS. WE ALSO
HAVE A NOTABLE SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL
WELL-BEING AND MENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES PROGRAM THAT'S
RECOGNIZED BY THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IN SAN DIEGO
COUNTY. WE HAVE SOCIAL WORKERS
AND PSYCHOLOGISTS AND EVEN A
CURRICULUM ACROSS ALL OF OUR
CLASSROOMS FOR SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL
AND TIME MOVES VERY QUICKLY. I
KNOW YOU HAVE A LAST SLIDE. I
HAVE ONE MIGHT WANT TO FOCUS ON
THAT ONE. I WILL. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU CHAIR. OH THERE WE GO.
SO ON THE LEFT SIDE YOU SEE THE
SUCCESSES THAT OUR DISTRICT HAS,
INCLUDING REDUCING CHRONIC
ABSENTEEISM IN SIX OF OUR
SCHOOLS BY 22 TO 53% OF REDUCED
CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM IN A SINGLE
YEAR. AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT ARE
THE NEEDS? SO OUR ASKS, ARE FIVE
THINGS ONE. FUND EDUCATION IN
CALIFORNIA IN THE TOP TEN STATES
AND THE TOP TEN STATES FUND
EDUCATION WITH 18,000 TO 24,000
PER PUPIL IN SPENDING. OUR
CURRENT BASE GRANTS FROM THE
LCFF ARE ONLY 10,000 TO 12,000,
SO YOU CAN SEE WE NEED TO
INCREASE THE BASE GRANT BY ABOUT
8 TO 12,000 PER STUDENT AND
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR
OUR HOMELESS AND FOSTER YOUTH,
AND CONSIDER A DUPLICATED COUNT
FOR THIS SUBGROUP OF STUDENTS.
INCREASE SPECIAL EDUCATION
FUNDING. RIGHT NOW, OUR GENERAL
FUND CONTRIBUTES 67% OF THE
TOTAL COSTS OF SPECIAL EDUCATION
IN OUR DISTRICT, AND THEN
FINALLY UTILIZE AN ALTERNATIVE
METHOD OF CALCULATING POVERTY
RATE. BECAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE
THE UNIVERSAL MILLS. SO WE DO
NEED A NEW FORMULA OR
CALIBRATION FOR THAT. AGAIN,
IT'S SUCH AN HONOR AND THANK YOU
SO MUCH FOR LISTENING AND FOR
CARING ABOUT THE 6 MILLION
STUDENTS WE SERVE IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU TO ALL OF YOU. AND
JUST LIKE PREVIOUSLY, DON'T GO
TOO FAR. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE
PANEL NUMBER FOUR. AND THEN
WE'RE GOING TO BRING YOU ALL UP.
AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A
DISCUSSION TOGETHER. SO THANK
YOU ALL AND ASK THE PANELISTS
FOR ISSUE FOUR TO PLEASE COME
FORWARD. IT'S THIS PANEL IS
FOCUSING ON ACHIEVING EQUITY.
THE LCFF CONCENTRATION GRANT
DESIGN AND OUTCOMES. WE WILL
THIS ISSUE IS ABOUT THE LCFF
CONCENTRATION GRANT FISCAL
DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND CURRENT
SYSTEMS AND STUDENT OUTCOMES
FROM THE COMPONENT OF THE
FORMULA AND RECOMMENDATIONS.
AGAIN, KEEP SAYING THAT IN EVERY
PANEL RECOMMENDATIONS. WE WANT
TO HEAR THAT FROM YOU ON HOW TO
IMPROVE OUTCOMES. SO WE HAVE
JULIAN ONCE AGAIN FROM PC
PROVIDE A OVERVIEW ON THIS
ISSUE. AND JULIAN, YOU'LL GO
FIRST. GREAT. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. THANKS AGAIN FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. SO JUST TO
I GUESS ELABORATE NOW ON SOME OF
WHAT I DISCUSSED EARLIER AND
FOCUS A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT DESIGN. I DO
WANT TO MENTION BIG PICTURE
FIRST THAT LIKE CALIFORNIA, MORE
THAN HALF OF STATES FUND FOR
CONCENTRATED POVERTY OR NEED IN
SOME WAY. AND BROADLY THESE
REFLECT A BODY OF RESEARCH THAT
DOCUMENTS SPECIFIC PLACE BASED
CONCENTRATIONS OF ECONOMIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND OTHER
SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS THAT
COMPOUND EDUCATIONAL CHALLENGES.
AND INDEED, OUR RESEARCH AND
OTHER RESEARCH ON LCFF FINDS
THAT CONCENTRATION FUNDING HAS
IMPROVED TEST SCORES AND
IMPROVED AID COMPLETION RATES,
AND NATIONALLY, RESEARCH TENDS
TO FIND LARGER IMPACTS IN A PER
DOLLAR SENSE IN LOWER INCOME AND
HIGHER NEED CONTEXTS. SO WITH
THAT SAID, THE EVIDENCE FOR
EQUITY AND EFFICACY OF THE
CONCENTRATION FRAMEWORK IS
STRONG AND WELL SUPPORTED. SO
FOR THIS PANEL, I WANT TO RETURN
TO THE THEME DISCUSSED EARLIER
ABOUT WHETHER DOLLARS INTENDED
FOR HIGH NEED STUDENTS ARE
INDEED REACHING THEM, OR WHETHER
THEY OPERATE EFFECTIVELY AS BASE
FUNDING. AND IN FACT, WHEN WE
LOOK AT THIS SPECIFICALLY FOR
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS OR FOR
THOSE DISTRICTS THAT RECEIVE
CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDING, WE
FIND THAT THEY IN FACT SPEND
MORE EQUALLY AND TARGET LESS.
AND SO EARLIER I MENTIONED THAT
SPENDING IS ROUGHLY $0.63 HIGHER
AT A SCHOOL FOR EACH HIGH NEED
DOLLAR IT GENERATES IN OTHER
SCHOOLS OVER OTHER SCHOOLS IN
THE SAME DISTRICT. YET THIS
TARGETING IS EVEN LOWER THAN IN
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS. SO IN
THE MEDIAN CONCENTRATION
DISTRICT, WE OBSERVE TARGETING
OF LESS THAN ABOUT $0.35 ON THE
DOLLAR. IN THE FIRST YEAR OF
PANDEMIC 2020 2021, AND THEN
UNDER $0.15 PER DOLLAR
PRE-PANDEMIC. WE ALSO HAVE
EXAMINED EL CAP PLANNED
EXPENDITURES TO SEE WHETHER
SPENDING PLANS THAT DISTRICTS
WRITE ARE PROPORTIONAL TO THE
FUNDING THAT THEY RECEIVE, AND
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
DOLLARS. AND HERE, CONCENTRATION
DISTRICTS HAVE ALSO SHOWN LESS
TARGETING ABOUT 80% OF
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS PLANNED
LESS LCFF SPENDING ON HIGH NEEDS
STUDENT GROUPS THAN THE TOTAL
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
FUNDING THEY RECEIVED, AND THAT
SHARE ACTUALLY IS LESS THAN HALF
IN OVER 25% OF CONCENTRATION
DISTRICTS. AGAIN SUGGESTING THAT
DOLLARS ARE SPREAD MORE EQUALLY
ACROSS STUDENTS AND SCHOOLS.
NOW, OF COURSE, THIS LACK OF
TARGETING PERHAPS IS NOT
SURPRISING AND MAY NOT EVEN BE
AS MUCH OF A POLICY CONCERN IN A
CONCENTRATION DISTRICT, DOLLARS
SPENT DISTRICT WIDE. THERE WILL
STILL MOSTLY BENEFIT HIGH NEEDS
STUDENTS, NO MATTER HOW THEY'RE
SPENT OR ON WHOM. BUT THIS LACK
OF TARGETING DOES HAVE
CONSEQUENCES. JUST UNDER HALF OF
HIGHER INCOME STUDENTS IN THE
STATE ARE ACTUALLY IN
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS, AND
MANY LARGE DISTRICTS HAVE
VARIATION IN NEED ACROSS SCHOOL
SITES, INCLUDING, YOU KNOW, VERY
AFFLUENT SCHOOLS WITH MUCH LOWER
CONCENTRATIONS OF NEED. THUS, IF
THESE FUNDS ARE NOT FURTHER
TARGETED WITHIN DISTRICT, AGAIN,
THE EQUITY IMPACT OF THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT ITSELF IS
DIMINISHED. SO THEN WHAT? THEN
CAN WE DO ABOUT ENSURING
TARGETED DOLLARS REACH HIGH?
NEED STUDENTS? AND I THINK, AS
MENTIONED IN THE EARLIER PANELS,
THE FIRST KEY STEP IS BETTER
TRANSPARENCY. EL CAPS ARE NOT
FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS. AND THE
SITE LEVEL SPENDING DATA THAT WE
HAVE IS EXTREMELY LIMITED,
COLLECTED FOR FEDERAL PURPOSES,
AND COMES WITH MANY CAVEATS AND
LIMITATIONS ON ITS USE. NEXT,
GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY OVER
TARGETED SPENDING IS WORTH
CONSIDERING. AS I MENTIONED
BEFORE, CALIFORNIA IS NOT UNIQUE
IN ITS FUNDING FOR NEED OR
CONCENTRATED NEED, BUT SOME
OTHER STATES REQUIRE THAT ALL OR
A PORTION OF ADDITIONAL TARGETED
DOLLARS ARE INDEED SPENT ON THE
STUDENTS THAT GENERATE THEM.
THIS INCLUDES STATES ACROSS THE
POLITICAL SPECTRUM. MARYLAND,
WASHINGTON, AND TEXAS WISH TO
OFFER ONE FINAL CONSIDERATION.
FROM OUR RESEARCH, WE FIND THAT
EVEN IN DISTRICTS THAT DO SPEND
MORE ON THEIR HIGH NEEDS, SCHOOL
SITES, THE RESULTING STAFF
MIXTURE IS NOT EQUIVALENT. HIGH
POVERTY SCHOOLS SEE SMALLER
CLASS SIZES, BUT LED BY LESS
EXPERIENCED EDUCATORS WITH FEWER
CREDENTIALS. THUS, WHILE WE
MEASURE MORE EQUAL OR EQUITABLE
SPENDING EVEN WITHIN DISTRICTS,
THE DISTRIBUTION OF STAFFING
RESOURCES MAY NOT REFLECT THIS
EFFORT. RECENT EFFORTS TO
ADDRESS THESE DYNAMICS MAY HELP,
INCLUDING EXPANDED CONCENTRATION
GRANTS AND THE EQUITY
MULTIPLIER. AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE,
RESEARCH HAS NOT FULLY STUDIED
THEIR IMPACTS. NONETHELESS,
ENSURING THAT EFFORTS TO IMPROVE
FUNDING EQUITY DON'T OVERLOOK
THESE STAFFING DISTRIBUTIONS, I
THINK, IS KEY TO MAXIMIZING BOTH
THE EFFICIENCY, THE EQUITY AND
THE EFFICACY ULTIMATELY OF OUR
CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDING AND
OF LCFF MORE BROADLY. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. NOW WE'LL HAVE FROM
THE LEARNING POLICY INSTITUTE,
JONATHAN KAPLAN AGAIN. MAKE SURE
YOUR MICROPHONE IS ON. THANK YOU
AGAIN, CHAIR ALVAREZ AND
MURATSUCHI I'M GOING TO TRY TO
DRAW UP THE SLIDES HERE AGAIN.
JONATHAN KAPLAN, A SENIOR POLICY
ADVISOR AND RESEARCHER AT THE
LEARNING POLICY INSTITUTE. MY
COMMENTS HERE ARE GOING TO FOCUS
ON THE CONCENTRATION GRANT, ITS
SUCCESSES AND THE CHALLENGES
THAT THOSE SUCCESSES HIGHLIGHT,
AND STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING THE
LCF'S FISCAL DESIGN. YOU KNOW,
THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD BE
COMMENDED FOR INCLUDING THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT AS PART OF
THE FISCAL DESIGN OF THE LCFF.
IT WAS, YOU KNOW, I WAS AROUND
IN 2013. THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT
THAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO
OCCUR. BUT NOW WE KNOW THAT THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT IS ACTUALLY
BEEN QUITE SUCCESSFUL IN ITS
APPROACH. IT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT
SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH LARGER
CONCENTRATIONS OF DISADVANTAGED
STUDENTS HAVE ADDITIONAL
CHALLENGES AND PROVIDES
PROGRESSIVELY GREATER AMOUNTS OF
FUNDING AS A SHARE OF
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS INCREASES
ABOVE 55%. FINDINGS FROM A
RECENT RECENT REPORT PUBLISHED
BY LPA, PUBLISHED BY PROFESSOR
JOHNSON. AS WE'VE DISCUSSED
EARLIER, SHOW THAT THE LCFF
CONCENTRATION GRANT CAUSED
SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS IN MATH
AND READING ACHIEVEMENT AND HIGH
SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES IN
DISTRICTS THAT RECEIVE
CONCENTRATION GRANTS. THE REPORT
FOUND THAT THESE IMPROVEMENTS
GREW AS THE FUNDING, AS THE
FUNDING AND THE LENGTH OF
EXPOSURE TO IT INCREASED.
SPENDING THAT RESULTED IN
INSTRUCTIONAL EXPENDITURES WERE
THE ONES MOST ASSOCIATED WITH.
WITH GREATER STUDENT OUTCOMES.
IRONICALLY, THE SUCCESS OF THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT HIGHLIGHTS
CHALLENGES IN THE FISCAL DESIGN
OF THE LCFF. AS THIS CHART SHOWS
AND REFLECTS LCFF CONCENTRATION,
GRANTS ARE ONLY PROVIDED TO
SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS.
ENROLLMENT GREATER THAN 55%. AS
HAS BEEN DISCUSSED EARLIER, A
SO-CALLED KINK OCCURS AT THE 55%
THRESHOLD THAT ALLOWED PROFESSOR
JOHNSON AND OTHERS TO
DEMONSTRATE THAT THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT CAUSED
SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS IN
OUTCOMES FOR STUDENTS ENROLLED
IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT
RECEIVED CONCENTRATION GRANTS.
THIS CHART ALSO SHOWS SORRY, I
TAKE IT BACK. THIS CHART ALSO
SHOWS IMPROVED OUTCOMES FOR
STUDENTS IN MOST SCHOOL
DISTRICTS THAT DID NOT
CONCENTRATION GRANTS. HOWEVER,
STUDENT OUTCOMES AND SCHOOL
DISTRICTS JUST BELOW THE 55%
CONCENTRATION GRANT THRESHOLD
LAGGED STUDENT OUTCOMES IN
SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT RECEIVED
CONCENTRATION GRANTS. THESE
FINDINGS FROM PROFESSOR
JOHNSON'S RESEARCH, AS WELL AS
THOSE FROM OTHER STUDIES,
PRESENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR
STRENGTHENING THE FISCAL DESIGN
OF THE LOCAL CONTROL FUNDING
FORMULA, STRENGTHENING THE LCFS
FISCAL DESIGN SHOULD MAINTAIN
FOCUS ON THE CORE PRINCIPLE OF
EQUITY AND IMPROVING OUTCOMES
FOR STUDENTS WHO NEED ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT. EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN
THE FORMULA SHOULD ALSO SUSTAIN
IMPROVEMENTS IN OUTCOMES. THE
LCFF HAS ACHIEVED FOR
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. TO
ADDRESS CHALLENGES IN THE FISCAL
DESIGN OF THE LCFF WILL MEAN
IDENTIFYING STUDENTS WHO REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT AND TARGETING
FUNDING TO MEET THEIR NEEDS. FOR
EXAMPLE, AS MR. LAFORTUNE, JUST
ACKNOWLEDGED, IT IS NOTABLE THAT
AROUND ONE OUT OF EVERY FIVE
STUDENTS IN CALIFORNIA THAT THE
LCFF TARGETS FOR ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT ARE IN SCHOOL DISTRICTS,
THAT ARE INELIGIBLE FOR
CONCENTRATION GRANTS, BUT THE
FISCAL DESIGN OF THE LCFF DOES
NOT TARGET CONCENTRATION GRANTS
FOR THESE DISTRICTS. A STRATEGY
FOR IMPROVING THE STRATEGY FOR
STRENGTHENING THE LCFF COULD BE
ADJUSTING THE 55% THRESHOLD FOR
SCHOOL DISTRICT ELIGIBILITY FOR
CONCENTRATION GRANTS TO PROVIDE
THESE SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO SCHOOL
DISTRICTS WITH FEWER THAN 55%
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS TO
ADDRESS THE FUNDING CLIFF THAT
OTHERS HAVE HAVE DISCUSSED THAT
CURRENTLY EXISTS AT THE 55%
THRESHOLD, THE RATES FOR THESE
GRANTS COULD BE GRADUALLY
REDUCED AS THE SHARE OF
DISTRICTS DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS
DECLINES. ANOTHER STRATEGY FOR
STRENGTHENING ANOTHER STRATEGY
FOR STRENGTHENING THE LCFF WOULD
BE TO TARGET ADDITIONAL FUNDING
TO SUPPORT DISADVANTAGED AND
SCHOOL DISTRICTS INELIGIBLE FOR
CONCENTRATION GRANTS, OPTIONS
FOR ACHIEVING THIS COULD INCLUDE
CHANGES TO THE LOCAL CONTROL
FUNDING FORMULA SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT, INCLUDING INCREASING THE
GRANT WEIGHT AND CALCULATING
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS BASED ON THE
COUNT OF STUDENTS IN MORE THAN
ONE GROUP IDENTIFIED FOR
ADDITIONAL FUNDING. THANKS AGAIN
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
WITH YOU TODAY. I LOOK FORWARD
TO ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. NOW
WE HAVE FROM SAN DIEGO UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT, DOCTOR FABI
BAGYULA. WELCOME. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON. CHAIR ALVAREZ.
CHAIR MURATSUCHI AND MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE. I AM DOCTOR
FABIOLA BAGYULA, AND I'M THE
INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT AT SAN
DIEGO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
BE HERE TODAY AND TO SHARE THE
IMPACTS OF THE LCFF
CONCENTRATION GRANT AT SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED. MY TESTIMONY HERE TODAY
IS INFORMED BY MY NEARLY 30
YEARS EXPERIENCE AS A TEACHER,
PRINCIPAL, EXECUTIVE COACH, AND
DIRECTOR OF EQUITY AT BOTH SAN
DIEGO UNIFIED AND SAN DIEGO
COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION. AND
SO I BRING THESE EXPERIENCES
BOTH AS AN EDUCATOR, AS A
RESEARCHER, BUT ALSO AS A
STEWARD OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES.
I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT OUR
DISTRICT SERVES A DIVERSE
BINATIONAL REGION WITH SAN DIEGO
BORDER AND WITH MEXICO THE
LARGEST, AND THE BUSIEST
INTERNATIONAL BORDER THAT
REFLECTS GLOBAL CHALLENGES AND
THE HEALTH OF OUR WORLDWIDE
COMMUNITY. AT SAN DIEGO UNIFIED,
WE'VE BEEN PROUD TO WELCOME
IMMIGRANTS FROM HAITI,
AFGHANISTAN, UKRAINE, AND LATIN
AMERICA. AND IN FACT, WE'VE JUST
RECENTLY OPENED TWO NEW WELCOME
CENTERS FOR OUR IMMIGRANT
FAMILIES. THIS IS ONE REASON I
STRONGLY SUPPORT THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT, WHICH,
AMONG OTHER THINGS, ALLOWS US TO
SUPPORT OUR IMMIGRANT STUDENTS
AND ACHIEVE EQUITY AT SCALE.
HOWEVER, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE
THAT WE CAN ONLY SUCCEED IF
EDUCATION FUNDING AS A WHOLE IS
STRENGTHENED WITH ADEQUACY AND
EQUITY AS ITS CORE. INCREASING
LCFF BASED GRANT TARGETS IS
ESSENTIAL, ESPECIALLY NOW WHEN
FEDERAL RELIEF FUNDS HAVE
EXPIRED AND WE CONTINUE TO
NAVIGATE A SLOW RECOVERY FROM
THE PANDEMIC. BEFORE DISCUSSING
THE IMPACTS OF THE CONCENTRATION
GRANT, I WOULD LIKE I WOULD LIKE
TO PROVIDE SOME CONTEXT ABOUT
OUR DISTRICT. SO SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED IS THE SECOND LARGEST
DISTRICT IN CALIFORNIA, SERVING
OVER 95,000 STUDENTS AND
EMPLOYING OVER 12,000 FULL TIME
EQUIVALENT STAFF. OUR
DEMOGRAPHICS ARE ABOUT 45%
LATINO, 24% WHITE, 10% ASIAN, 9%
TWO OR MORE RACES, AND 7%
AFRICAN AMERICAN. ADDITIONALLY,
17% OF OUR STUDENTS ARE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNERS. 17% OF OUR
STUDENTS ARE STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES, AND 7% ARE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. MORE
THAN 58% OF OUR STUDENTS ARE
SOCIOECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED.
IN TOTAL, OUR UNDUPLICATED PUPIL
PERCENTAGE IS 60.2%. RECENTLY,
DOCTOR LINDA DARLING-HAMMOND,
PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE
LEARNING POLICY INSTITUTE AND
THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION,
PUBLICLY NAMED US AS THE TOP
PERFORMING URBAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
IN THE COUNTRY. YET WE REMAIN
COMMITTED TO OUR ONGOING
PROGRESS TO OUR INCREASE, OUR
ASSESSMENT RESULTS. AND EVEN AS
WE CELEBRATE THIS NEWS, WE ALSO
RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF
WORK TO DO. AND I LIKE TO SAY
THAT UNTIL 100% OF OUR STUDENTS,
100% OF THE TIME, ACHIEVE BOTH
ACADEMICALLY AND WITH JOY IN
ORDER TO LIVE A CHOICE FILLED
LIFE, WE WILL ALWAYS HAVE WORK
TO DO. SO REGARDING HOW WE'RE
USING OUR CONCENTRATION GRANT,
SAN DIEGO UNIFIED RECEIVES 30
MILLION IN CONCENTRATION GRANT
FUNDING, WHICH WE UTILIZE
THROUGH AN INTENTIONAL AND
HOLISTIC APPROACH OVER THE LAST
TWO YEARS, WE HAVE WORKED VERY
INTENTIONALLY WITH OUR BOARD OF
EDUCATION IN A STRATEGY TITLED
STUDENT OUTCOMES FOCUSED
GOVERNANCE. SO THIS IS WHAT WE
WANT TO DO. WE WANT TO EMPHASIZE
TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY AND
DATA DRIVEN OUTCOMES FOCUSED ON
OUR INVESTMENTS. THROUGH THIS
PROCESS, WE HAVE SET SPECIFIC
AND MEASURABLE GOALS TO IMPROVE
STUDENT OUTCOMES IN EFFECTIVE
COMMUNICATION, PROBLEM SOLVING,
COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS,
AND WELLNESS. AND WE WILL BE
TRANSPARENT IN MONITORING THESE
GOALS WITH PUBLICLY NAMING OUR
METRICS. AT EVERY BOARD MEETING
WE HAVE ALSO UNDERGONE AN
EXTENSIVE PROCESS TO IDENTIFY
SPOTLIGHT STUDENTS AT EACH
SCHOOL. THESE ARE THE STUDENTS
WHO ARE MOST IN NEED AND
ADDITIONAL TO THE SUPPORT. NOW
THIS IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE
BECAUSE IT IS LOCAL CONTROL. WE
HAVE A VERY LARGE, DIVERSE AND
SEGREGATED CITY BASED ON
SOCIOECONOMICS, AND SO IT WAS
VERY IMPORTANT FOR US TO THINK
ABOUT WHERE OUR STUDENTS ARE AT
EACH AND EVERY SCHOOL. WE
BELIEVE THAT CREATING CONDITIONS
FOR OUR SPOTLIGHT STUDENTS TO
THRIVE BENEFITS OUR ENTIRE
SCHOOL COMMUNITY, AND AS A
RESULT, THEIR NEEDS ARE THE
FOCUS OF THE LCAP AND THE BUDGET
PROCESS. AFTER IDENTIFYING THESE
PRIORITIES, WE CONTINUE TO BUILD
OUR BUDGET CENTERED AND ROOTED
IN STUDENT CENTERED VALUES AND
THEN LAYERING RESOURCES AND
FUNDING STREAMS TO SUPPORT THEM.
MANY OF OUR SPOTLIGHT STUDENTS
ARE UNDUPLICATED, MAKING
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANTS. A CRITICAL PART OF THIS
APPROACH. OUR CONCENTRATION
GRANT FUNDING HAS BEEN ESSENTIAL
IN PROVIDING ADDITIONAL
SOCIOECONOMIC. SORRY, EXCUSE ME,
SOCIAL EMOTIONAL RESOURCES FOR
OUR HIGHEST NEEDS STUDENTS,
INCLUDING MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCE
CENTERS. ABILITY TO INCREASE OUR
NUMBER OF SCHOOL COUNSELORS,
BEHAVIORAL SUPPORT SPECIALISTS,
AND FAMILY SERVICE SPECIALISTS,
WHILE ALSO PROVIDING OTHER WHOLE
CHILD SERVICES WHILE THE
CONCENTRATION GRANT IS VITAL FOR
SUPPORTING EQUITABLE OUTCOMES IN
OUR DISTRICTS, I WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT SOME CHALLENGES OVER
THE LAST TEN YEARS THE RISING
COST OF LIVING AND LACK OF
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN SAN DIEGO
HAVE CREATED A STARK MISMATCH
BETWEEN WHAT IS CONSIDERED LOW,
LOW INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF
LCFF FUNDING AND THE REALITY
FACED BY OUR FAMILIES. IN 2023,
SAN DIEGO BECAME THE HIGHEST
COST OF LIVING CITY IN THE
COUNTRY. CONSEQUENTLY, MANY OF
OUR FAMILIES WHO DO NOT MEET THE
INCOME CRITERIA TO BE COUNTED AS
UNDUPLICATED STILL HAVE DEEP AND
URGENT NEEDS THAT REQUIRE
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT. SO FOR
CONTEXT, THE INCOME THRESHOLD
FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR TO BE
COUNTED AS LOW INCOME FOR LCFF
IS $57,720. IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY,
THE US DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERS A
FAMILY OF FOUR TO BE LOW INCOME
IF THEY EARN LESS THAN $121,000,
MORE THAN DOUBLE THE LCFF LOW
INCOME THRESHOLD. THIS IS
PARTICULARLY CONCERNING BECAUSE
DISTRICTS THAT DROP 55%
UNDUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE
LOSE THEIR CONCENTRATION GRANT
FUNDING AT SAN DIEGO UNIFIED.
THAT MEANS THAT A 5% DECREASE IN
OUR UNDUPLICATED STUDENT
POPULATION WOULD TRIGGER AN
ABRUPT LOSS OF $30 MILLION THAT
CURRENTLY SUPPORTS OUR HIGHEST
NEED STUDENTS. THIS FUNDING
CLIFF DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO A
CLIFF IN OUR STUDENTS NEEDS,
PARTICULARLY BECAUSE MANY OF OUR
LOW INCOME FAMILIES ARE NOT
REFLECTED IN THE FORMULA. I WANT
TO EMPHASIZE THE NEEDS OF OUR
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES,
WHICH I KNOW HAVE BEEN MENTIONED
ALL MORNING, WHOM ARE ALSO
SPOTLIGHT STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT
CAPTURED HERE. WE'RE GRATEFUL
FOR THE FUNDING THAT THE
LEGISLATURE PROVIDES US OUTSIDE
OF LCFF FOR THESE STUDENTS.
HOWEVER, AS THE PROPORTION OF
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES WE
SERVE CONTINUES TO GROW RELATIVE
TO OUR TOTAL POPULATION, THIS
HAS BECOME AN URGENT AND GROWING
AREA OF NEED IN OUR DISTRICT.
CAN I ASK YOU FOR FINAL
COMMENTS, PLEASE? FINALLY, I
MUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE
PROFOUND AND ONGOING IMPACT OF
THE COVID 19 PANDEMIC LEARNING
LOSS IS SOMETHING THAT WE OFTEN
DISCUSS, BUT MORE THAN 32,000
SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN IN
CALIFORNIA ALSO LOST A
CAREGIVER. THE LASTING IMPACT OF
THIS LOSS ON OUR CHILDREN
ACADEMIC, MENTAL AND EMOTIONAL
WELL-BEING CANNOT BE OVERSTATED.
IN CONCLUSION, WE THANK YOU FOR
YOUR ATTENTION. THERE IS MORE
NUANCED MEASURES OF STUDENT NEED
WOULD BE BETTER TO TAKE A LOOK
AT STUDENT OUTCOMES, BUT
ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY,
MONITORING ARE NECESSARY
COMPONENTS IN ORDER TO TRULY
REPLICATE THE BEST PRACTICES
THAT DISTRICTS HAVE USED IN
ORDER TO IMPROVE STUDENT
OUTCOMES. AND I WILL ALSO ADD TO
STRATEGICALLY ABANDON SOME OF
THE THINGS THAT HAVEN'T WORKED.
SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
TIME AND YOUR CARE. THANK YOU
FOR BEING HERE. MODESTO CITY
SCHOOLS DOCTOR SARAH NOGUCHI,
WELCOME. THANK YOU. IT'S AN
HONOR TO BE HERE. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR YOUR FOR YOUR TIME AND
ENGAGING IN THIS VERY IMPORTANT
CONVERSATION. I'M SARAH NOGUCHI,
I AM THE SUPERINTENDENT FOR
MODESTO CITY SCHOOLS. I'VE BEEN
IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY NOW FOR
SEVEN YEARS. BUT BEFORE THAT I
WAS IN ELK GROVE UNIFIED FOR 17
YEARS, SACRAMENTO CITY FOR FOUR,
AND TWIN RIVERS FOR THREE. SO
I'M A SACRAMENTO GAL AND
UNDERSTAND THE VALLEY, BUT I SAY
THAT BECAUSE I HAVE SEEN
FIRSTHAND WHAT LCFF HAS DONE
OVER THE YEARS TO TRANSFORM
EDUCATION, LIVING THROUGH AS AN
ADMINISTRATOR PRIOR TO LCFF, IT
REALLY IS A DIFFERENT IT'S A
DIFFERENT TIME AND IT'S A
DIFFERENT GAME, AND IT'S WE'RE
WE'RE WE'RE IN THE RIGHT SPACE.
I AGREE EARLIER WITH TODAY'S
COMMENTS THAT LET'S NOT CHANGE
THE HOUSE. LET'S JUST DO A
LITTLE BIT OF REMODELING. SO I
DEFINITELY AGREE WITH THAT. I AM
ALSO THE LEAD AGENCY OR MODESTO
CITY SCHOOLS IS ALSO THE LEAD
AGENCY FOR CAL SSD, WHICH IS THE
CALIFORNIA SUBURBAN SCHOOL
DISTRICTS. THAT GIVES ME THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO A NUMBER
OF DIFFERENT SUPERINTENDENTS UP
AND DOWN CALIFORNIA AND REALLY
LISTENING TO THEIR CONCERNS AND
THE CHALLENGES THAT THEY HAVE.
I'M ALSO AN ADVISORY MEMBER FOR
CCE, WHICH IS A CALIFORNIA
COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATION
EXCELLENCE, WHICH REALLY GIVES
ME A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN
ABOUT INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
AND IMPROVEMENTS. AND THEN
LASTLY, EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBER
FOR FCMAT, WHICH IS CHRIS,
FISCAL CRISIS MANAGEMENT
ASSISTANCE TEAM. AND WE'VE WE
HEARD FROM MIKE EARLIER, I'M
GOING TO CHANGE UP MY
PRESENTATION JUST A LITTLE BIT
FROM THE PRESENTATION THAT I
SHARED WITH YOU YESTERDAY,
BECAUSE MUCH OF MY PRESENTATION
IS REDUNDANT. AND SO WE DON'T
NEED TO GO THROUGH TEN SLIDES
HEARING THE SAME THING. I'M
GOING TO GO THROUGH THE FIRST
THREE PRIMARILY IF THEY'RE UP
THERE. YEP. PERFECT. SO MODESTO
CITY SCHOOLS IS TWO SCHOOLS IS
ACTUALLY A TWO SCHOOL DISTRICT.
WE HAVE AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
DISTRICT AND A HIGH SCHOOL
DISTRICT. THE ELEMENTARY IS A TK
EIGHT. BOTH DISTRICTS ARE ABOUT
15,000. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT
MODESTO CITY SCHOOLS IS ONE OF
THE DISTRICTS THAT REALLY GET A
LARGE CONCENTRATION OF DOLLARS,
BOTH SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION. AND I'M GOING TO
SPEND JUST ONE SLIDE TALKING
ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THOSE
DOLLARS A LITTLE BIT LATER ON.
WE ARE A VERY DIVERSE DISTRICT.
WE HAVE 58 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.
OUR ENGLISH LEARNERS, A LITTLE
OVER 7000 FOSTER YOUTH, 79
HOMELESS, 277 AND THEN LASTLY
3811. SPECIAL ED AND I SHARE
THAT BECAUSE I'VE HEARD
THROUGHOUT TODAY THE NEED FOR
LOOKING AT SPECIAL EDUCATION AND
UNDERSTANDING THEIR NEEDS. AND
I'M GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE AUTISM NUMBERS HERE
AND THE IMPACT. SO THIS NEXT
SLIDE SORRY. LET'S GO BACK. ALL
RIGHT. SO OVER THIS LAST AS WE
KNOW WE'VE COMING OUT OF THE
PANDEMIC AND WE'VE HAD SOME
SERIOUS CHALLENGES WITH DROPOUT
GRADUATION RATE ANY SORT OF
STUDENT OUTCOME. YOU LOOK AT WE
IT WAS REALLY PROBLEMATIC. I CAN
SAY OVER THIS LAST FOUR YEARS WE
HAVE DOUBLED DOWN ON THE COVID
DOLLARS THAT WE RECEIVED AND
UNLIKE SOME DISTRICTS THAT DID
NOT SPEND IT ON PEOPLE, WE DID
SPEND IT ON PEOPLE AND WE
CAPITALIZED ON REALLY THE NOTION
OF ADULT TO STUDENT RATIO AND
REALLY TRIED TO REDUCE THE
AMOUNT OF STUDENTS IN ANY ONE
PROGRAM. AND I'LL TALK ABOUT
THAT IN JUST A MOMENT. I'M VERY
PROUD OF THE DATA THAT IS COMING
OUT. THIS YEAR. AND THERE'S MORE
THAN THIS. I KNOW THAT IT WAS
FIVE MINUTES, SO I NEEDED TO
KEEP IT FAIRLY QUICK, BUT
GRADUATION RATE IS THE HIGHEST
IT'S BEEN IN SEVEN YEARS.
DROPOUT RATE THE LOWEST IT'S
BEEN IN SEVEN YEARS. OUR
RECLASSIFICATION RATE ALMOST
DOUBLED, ALMOST INCREASED BY
100%. WE ARE JUST A LITTLE BIT
SHY. AND THEN OUR CASP DATA,
THAT'S A TWO YEAR GAIN. THAT'S
NOT WHERE WE NEED TO BE. IN FACT,
WE'RE SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN
THE STATE AVERAGE. BUT WE'RE
MAKING STEADY GROWTH. AND SO THE
QUESTION IS HOW DID WE GET HERE?
HOW DID WE USE SUPPLEMENTAL
CONCENTRATION DOLLARS AND ALSO
COVID DOLLARS TO BE ABLE TO MAKE
THAT HAPPEN? NOPE. I'M
STRUGGLING WITH THIS. SORRY
ABOUT THAT. ALL RIGHT I'M GOING
TO STOP HERE. SO AND THIS WILL
BE THE LAST SLIDE THAT I SHARE.
AND THEN I HAVE SOME SOME POINTS
THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT JUST AS
FAR AS SOME, SOME THEMES THAT I
HEARD TODAY. YOU KNOW, OUT THAT
SLIDE. JUST DON'T QUICK TO DON'T
CLICK TOO MUCH BECAUSE THEN IT
JUMPS SLIDES. THERE WE GO. SO
IMPACT OF COVID DOLLARS. SO WE
ALL RECOGNIZE THAT A LARGE
NUMBER OF DOLLARS CAME INTO THE
SYSTEM AS A RESULT OF COVID,
EITHER STATE OR FEDERAL. IN
MODESTO CITY WE REALLY DOUBLED
DOWN ON THE NOTION OF REDUCING
CLASS SIZE, NOT ONLY CLASS SIZE,
BUT PROGRAM SIZE IN ALL OF OUR
22 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, WE
DEVELOPED A PROGRAM CALLED
MULTI-TIERED SUPPORT SYSTEM.
THIS IS NOTHING NEW, BUT WHAT IT
MEANT TO US WAS IT'S LOCALIZED
INSTRUCTION FOR ALL STUDENTS
GRADE K THROUGH SIX LEVELS TO
GROUPS. IN SOME CASES SIZE OF
FOUR OR 7 OR 11. BUT IT WAS ALL
LEVELS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF
THOSE STUDENTS. KNOWING THAT WE
WANTED TO MOVE THEM FORWARD BY
AT LEAST TWO YEARS. IN THE TIME
THAT WE HAD THIS PROGRAM. THIS
PROGRAM WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE
MAINTAINED. THIS AS IT STANDS
MOVING FORWARD BECAUSE IT IS A
VERY COSTLY PROGRAM, BUT IT DOES
SHOW THE IMPACT OF ADULT TO
STUDENT RATIO. ONE THING THAT
MULTI-TIERED SUPPORT SYSTEM IN
ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS DOESN'T
SHOW IN THE CASP TESTING IS THE
DRAMATIC INCREASE OF THE
STUDENTS AT THE VERY BOTTOM IN
CASP, IT'S RECOGNIZED FOR MEETS
OR EXCEEDS. BUT WHAT WE'VE DONE
THROUGH MTSS IS WE'VE TAKEN THE
VERY BOTTOM AND WE'VE MOVED IT
UP TO THE MIDDLE, BUT WE'RE NOT
GETTING CREDIT FOR IT YET. I AM
CONFIDENT THAT NEXT YEAR WE WILL
SHOW SOME GREAT GAINS. THE NEXT
ONE IS A CO-TEACHING. WE
RECOGNIZE ALGEBRA IN NINTH GRADE
IS A GATEKEEPER NOT ONLY FOR A
THROUGH G AND, AND OUR KIDS
ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO GET INTO A
FOUR YEAR PROGRAM, BUT ALSO
GRADUATION. SO WHAT WE DID WITH
OUR STUDENTS THAT WERE TWO GRADE
LEVELS OR BELOW IN NINTH GRADE,
IN THE AREA OF MATH, WE PUT TWO
TEACHERS TOGETHER. SO WE HAVE
TWO TEACHERS TEACHING ALGEBRA IN
A CO-TEACHING MODEL, AND WE'VE
DONE THIS NOW FOR THREE YEARS.
AGAIN, VERY COSTLY PROGRAM
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TWO TEACHERS
TEACHING IN A SPACE THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN ONE TEACHER. AND WE'VE
SEEN SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS
WITH THESE D AND F RATES. AND
ALSO OUR BENCHMARKS. AND THEN
LASTLY, GREAT EXPANSE WITH
MENTAL HEALTH AT ALL OF OUR
SCHOOLS AND ADDITIONAL
COUNSELING RESOURCES FOR ALL
STUDENTS, BUT ALSO STAFF AND
PARENTS AND OTHER PIECE TO THIS
EQUATION THAT WE HAVE IS THE
RESOURCES THAT WE NEED TO BE
ABLE TO SUPPORT OUR PARENTS, NOT
ONLY IN UNDERSTANDING THE
EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM, BUT ALSO
UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE OF
HELPING THEIR STUDENTS THROUGH
THE EDUCATION PROCESS. I'LL ASK
YOU FOR YOUR FINAL COMMENTS,
PLEASE. PERFECT. THE LAST THING
THAT I WOULD SAY IS WHEN I WHEN
I TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT I'VE HEARD
TODAY, I WOULD AGREE WITH FOUR
FOUR THEMES. ONE. ADDITIONAL
FUNDING IS NEEDED EITHER THE
BASE CONCENTRATION SUPPLEMENTAL,
I THINK LOOKING AT THE DATA THAT
THAT HAS COME OUT OF THE EXTRA
DOLLARS WITH COVID DEMONSTRATES
THAT ALSO THE NEED TO ADDRESS
SPECIAL EDUCATION JUST WITHIN
THE LAST TWO YEARS, WITH THE
NUMBER OF STUDENTS BEING
IDENTIFIED AS AUTISTIC, WE'VE
GONE FROM 220 OR 620 3 TO 805.
THAT PARTICULAR PROGRAM IS
EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE. ALSO, THE
NEED TO ADJUST FOR INFLATION AND
THEN LAST, THE DEFINITE NEED TO
LOOK AT THE MEASUREMENT. AND HOW
ARE WE MEASURING POVERTY BECAUSE
OF THE FREE THE UNIVERSAL LUNCH
PROGRAM. SO WITH THAT, I
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. I
APPRECIATE YOU. THANK YOU. FROM
THE CORONA-NORCO UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT, WE HAVE MELISSA
ELWOOD. WELCOME, MELISSA. THANK
YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MELISSA
ELWOOD. I'M THE ADMINISTRATIVE
DIRECTOR OF BUSINESS SERVICES
WITH CORONA-NORCO UNIFIED. A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT OUR DISTRICT.
WE ARE THE SEVENTH LARGEST
DISTRICT IN THE STATE WITH OVER
50,000 STUDENTS AND OVER 5500
EMPLOYEES. WE COVER NEARLY
150MI², BUT WE ARE THE LARGEST
DISTRICT IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY. WE
HAVE A UNIQUE MAKEUP OF SCHOOLS
IN OUR DISTRICT. 52 OF THEM. WE
HAVE 31 K THROUGH SIX GRADE
ELEMENTARIES, FIVE OF WHICH ARE
YEAR ROUND SCHOOLS. WE HAVE TWO
K-8 THROUGH EIGHTH GRADE
ACADEMIES, ONE TK THROUGH TWO K
THROUGH 12. VIRTUAL ACADEMY,
SEVEN INTERMEDIATE SCHOOLS, ONE
MIDDLE SCHOOL, FIVE
COMPREHENSIVE SCHOOLS,
COMPREHENSIVE HIGH SCHOOLS, TWO
ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOLS, ONE
SPECIAL EDUCATION. ELEMENTARY
THROUGH HIGH SCHOOL, ONE MIDDLE
COLLEGE HIGH SCHOOL, AND ONE
ADULT EDUCATION SCHOOL. OUR
STUDENTS ARE 53.2% HISPANIC,
20.6% WHITE, 13.3% ASIAN, AND
5.4% AFRICAN AMERICAN. WE ARE
NOW A CONCENTRATION DISTRICT FOR
JUST THREE YEARS NOW. THIS IS
OUR THIRD YEAR, SO WE'RE
RELATIVELY NEW. WE NGUYEN THE
ALTERNATIVE INCOME FORM CAME
OUT, WE WERE ABLE TO INCORPORATE
THAT INTO OUR ENROLLMENT
PROCESS. SO WE REALLY WERE ABLE
TO CAPTURE ADDITIONAL
SUBMISSIONS WITH THAT. IT SORT
OF TOOK AWAY THE STIGMA OF
FILLING OUT AN INCOME FORM FOR
FAMILIES AND OUR OUR UP, OUR
UNDUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE
HAS INCREASED OVER THE THREE
YEARS. WE BELIEVE WE ARE NOW
ACCURATELY COLLECTING THE
ACCURATE INCOME LEVELS OF OUR
COMMUNITY. NEARLY ALL OF OUR ALL
OF OUR SCHOOLS ARE IN HIGH
CONCENTRATION. WE HAVE ONE
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THAT IS AT
54%. THE REST ARE ALL 55% AND
ABOVE. PRIOR TO BECOMING A
CONCENTRATION DISTRICT, AS THE
LARGEST DISTRICT IN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY, WE WERE FUNDED THE LEAST
PER PUPIL, EVEN THOUGH WE HAD
OVER 20 OF OUR SCHOOLS WITH
CONCENTRATION LEVELS OF 55 TO
94%. OUR DISTRICT WANTED SMALLER
CLASS SIZES, FEWER COMBINATION
CLASSES, MORE SUPPORT STAFF
INCLUDING COUNSELORS, SPEECH AND
LANGUAGE PATHOLOGISTS,
INTERVENTION SPECIALISTS, NURSES
AND OTHER HEALTH STAFF, AND
MORE. BUT WITHOUT HAVING
CONCENTRATION FUNDING, THOSE
JUST WEREN'T POSSIBLE. SINCE
BECOMING A CONCENTRATION
DISTRICT, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO
IMPLEMENT CLASS SIZE REDUCTION
ACROSS OUR DISTRICT IN ALL GRADE
LEVELS. WE'VE GONE FROM 33 TO 25
IN KINDERGARTEN, 32 TO 27 IN THE
PRIMARY GRADES, 34 TO 31 IN THE
UPPER ELEMENTARY AND FROM 42 TO
36 IN SECONDARY. WE ARE AT NEAR
FULL IMPLEMENTATION. WE HAVE
POCKETS OF NOT FULL
IMPLEMENTATION, BUT WE WILL
ABSOLUTELY BE FULLY IMPLEMENTED
NEXT YEAR. SOME OF THE
CHALLENGES IS FACILITY SPACE.
IT'S VERY COSTLY AND ESPECIALLY
WITH AGING FACILITIES. WE'VE
ALSO ELIMINATED COMBINATION
CLASSES ACROSS THE DISTRICT,
WITH TWO EXCEPTIONS. ONE IS IN
OUR VIRTUAL ACADEMY AND THEN
ALSO IN OUR SELF-CONTAINED
SPECIAL EDUCATION CLASSROOMS.
WE'VE EXPANDED OUR SUMMER AFTER
SCHOOL AND WINTER INTERSESSION,
SUPPORTS TUTORING AND CREDIT
RECOVERY FOR OUR UNDUPLICATED
STUDENTS. BY BREEDING
CONCENTRATION FUNDING, ALONG
WITH THE EXPANDED LEARNING
OPPORTUNITIES PROGRAM, WE'VE
ADDED INTERVENTION TEACHERS TO
PUSH INTO CLASSROOMS AND PROVIDE
INTERVENTION SUPPORTS. WE'VE
EXPANDED OUR STEPS PROGRAM TO
HAVE A STEPS MENTAL HEALTH AIDE
AT EACH ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND
WE'VE ALSO INCREASED THEIR HOURS
TO SUPPORT DURING THE ENTIRE
SCHOOL DAY. WE'VE ADDED SOCIAL
WORKERS, INCREASED OUR
INTERVENTION COUNSELORS, WE'VE
ADDED A DEDICATED FOSTER AND
HOMELESS YOUTH COUNSELOR. WE'VE
INCREASED OUR BILINGUAL AIDES
HOURS TO PROVIDE MORE TIME TO
SUPPORT STUDENTS. WE'VE ALSO
INVESTED IN PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT FOR OUR CERTIFICATED
AND CLASSIFIED STAFF, TO THE
POINT THAT WE ARE NOW A PLC
DISTRICT AND WE GET TO SPEND 90
MINUTES EVERY SINGLE WEEK FOR
PROFESSIONAL LEARNING
COMMUNITIES. LIKE MOST OTHER
DISTRICTS IN THE STATE, WE ARE
DECLINING IN ENROLLMENT AND HAVE
FELT THE ADA CLIFF THIS YEAR.
BUT FOR CONCENTRATION FUNDING,
WE WOULD HAVE NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE
TO MAINTAIN OUR CURRENT PROGRAMS
AND SERVICE LEVELS AND MIGHT
HAVE FOUND OURSELVES IN THE SAME
POSITION MANY OF OUR LOCAL
DISTRICTS WERE IN REDUCING THEIR
WORKFORCE. WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO
MAINTAIN OUR SERVICE LEVELS, BUT
CONCENTRATION FUNDING IS
SUBSIDIZING OUR CORE EDUCATION.
WE HAVE BEEN INCREASING OUR
THREE YEAR ROLLING AVERAGE FOR
UNDUPLICATED PUPIL PERCENTAGE,
BUT WE ARE LEVELING OFF AND
ANTICIPATE IT TO MAINTAIN ITSELF
IS INSUFFICIENT TO COVER COST
ESCALATIONS. SO ABSENT AN
INFUSION OF FUNDS, THE COST
PRESSURES WILL FORCE US TO
REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE GREAT
THINGS WE'RE DOING FOR OUR
STUDENTS. WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL
TO NOW BE RECEIVING
CONCENTRATION, FUNDING, THE
LEVELS ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR
PROGRAMS. WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SCHOOL
SITES WITH CONCENTRATED
UNDUPLICATED. CAN I ASK YOU TO
MAKE SOME FINAL COMMENTS PLEASE?
AND ALSO FOR OUR UNDUPLICATED
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES, THE
NEEDS OF THESE STUDENT GROUPS
AND THE COST OF THOSE ARE
SIGNIFICANT. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S SEE
I THINK HOW WE'RE GOING TO
ORGANIZE ORGANIZE OURSELVES FOR
THIS DISCUSSION IS MAYBE WE'LL
KEEP SUPERINTENDENTS WHO ARE THE
PRACTITIONERS HERE AT THE FRONT.
AND THEN OUR DATA RESEARCH
FOLKS, IF YOU WANT TO JOIN US UP
HERE AT THE END DOWN AT THE
CORNER HERE WITH THE PREVIOUS
PANEL IS SAT THAT WOULD BE, I
THINK, THE BEST WAY TO CONDUCT
THIS PART OF THE CONVERSATION
AND DISCUSSION. AGAIN,
APPRECIATE YOU ALL BEING HERE.
APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR TESTIMONY.
I DO WANT TO SORT OF BRING US
BACK TO CENTER US ON THE INTENT
OF AND THE PURPOSE OF
PARTICULARLY THESE TWO PANELS.
WE WANTED TO FOCUS OUR ATTENTION
AND YOUR YOUR, YOUR TESTIMONY
AND YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE
CONVERSATION AROUND THE EQUITY
COMPONENT OF SOME OF THE
FUNDING. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE
BASE. WE TALKED ABOUT THE
ADEQUACY OF THE BASE. THERE'S
OBVIOUSLY SOME SOME CROSSOVER
WITH ADEQUACY FOR SOME OF THE
GROUPS POPULATIONS OF STUDENTS
AND SOME OF THE CONCENTRATION
FUNDING, WHICH YOU I THINK SOME
OF THE THEMES AND SOME OF YOU
HAVE SHARED, BUT I WOULD LIKE
YOU, ESPECIALLY FROM THE
SUPERINTENDENTS STANDPOINT, TO
GET MORE YOU KNOW, SOMEONE SAID
IT, I THINK REALLY WELL EARLIER
YOU'RE ALL DOING SORT OF AMAZING
WORK WITH WHAT YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN,
BUT WE REALLY WANT TO HEAR. AND
THE WHOLE POINT OF TODAY IS
WHERE CAN WE IMPROVE, WHAT CAN
BE DONE BETTER? AND WE WANT TO
HEAR SPECIFICS AND DON'T WANT TO
HEAR REALLY GENERALITIES OF HOW
THINGS ARE GOING. WE WANT TO
HEAR SPECIFICALLY, IF THE
LEGISLATURE WERE TO ACT IN A
DIFFERENT WAY, HOW CAN WE ACT IN
A WAY THAT'S HELPFUL AND NOT
HARMFUL TO WHAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE
TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE LAST DECADE
WITH LCFF? SO LET ME START OFF
WITH AND JUST LIKE THE LAST SET
OF PANELS, LOTS OF QUESTIONS FOR
DIFFERENT PEOPLE. SO HOPEFULLY
I'LL KEEP THIS IN AN ORDERLY
FASHION. BUT WE HAD THE LEARNING
POLICY INSTITUTE, I RAISED THIS
QUESTION IN THE PREVIOUS PANEL,
AND I MIGHT WANT TO GET THE LA
OES OFFICE TO SORT OF CHIME IN
AND PROVIDE SOME FEEDBACK, BUT I
DON'T RECALL. IT WAS I THINK IT
WAS MR. KAPLAN. I THINK DOCTOR
KAPLAN, I THINK YOU'RE THE ONE
WHO PRESENTED THIS CHART ON THE
WHICH WAS ACTUALLY FROM DOCTOR
JOHNSON'S RESEARCH. BUT YOU
TALKED ABOUT GRADUALLY REDUCING
OR AS HE DESCRIBED, A DIFFERENT
PROGRESSIVE APPROACH TO FUNDING
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS. CAN YOU
SHARE MORE ABOUT THAT? BECAUSE I
HAVEN'T REALLY I'M TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND PERHAPS WHAT ARE THE
WHAT ARE THE POINTS AT WHICH
PERHAPS THAT GRADUAL INCREASE
SHOULD OCCUR. AND, AND
UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWING ALSO
THAT EVEN AT THE THOSE THAT DO
HIT THE 55% THRESHOLD IS
PROBABLY NOT SUFFICIENT THAT
THAT BEING UNDERSTOOD, WHAT KIND
OF GROWTH DO WE NEED TO SEE IN
THOSE WHO ARE UNDER 55%? WELL,
THANKS FOR THE QUESTION. I WHAT
I BELIEVE THAT CHART SHOWS IS
THAT THERE'S A THERE'S A
CHALLENGE THAT EXISTS IN THE IN
THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT EXIST
JUST BELOW THE 55% THRESHOLD.
RIGHT. SO WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING
AT IS OF THAT, THERE ARE THERE
IS PINK IN THE 55% ALLOWS
RESEARCHERS TO DEMONSTRATE THE
EFFECT OF THE 55% THRESHOLD.
WHAT WHAT HAPPENS WITH FUNDING
ABOVE IT. WHAT THE POINT OF THAT
CHART IS, IS TO SHOW THAT JUST
BELOW THE 55% THRESHOLD, THERE
IS CONCENTRATED DISADVANTAGED
STUDENTS THAT ARE NOT RECEIVING
CONCENTRATED FUNDING. AND SO LET
ME ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
ARE WE TALKING ABOUT
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS OR ARE WE
TALKING ABOUT JUST DISTRICTS
WITH THAT LEVEL? THAT'S A GOOD
QUESTION. SO IT IS ACTUALLY
DISTRICT IN THAT CHART. IT SHOWS
DISTRICTS, RIGHT? IT'S A IT IS
THE DISTRICTS THAT HAVE THOSE
STUDENTS IN THEM. AND THEN WE
ARE. SO WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS
THAT DISTRICTS THAT ARE BELOW
THE 55% THRESHOLD ARE NOT DOING
AS WELL AS DISTRICTS THAT ARE
ABOVE THE 55% THRESHOLD. WE KNOW
THAT THERE ARE LARGE
CONCENTRATIONS OF STUDENTS THAT
HAVE DISADVANTAGED, THAT ARE IN
THOSE DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOT,
BUT THE DISTRICTS ARE NOT
RECEIVING CONCENTRATION GRANT
FUNDING. BUT HOW ARE THE
STUDENTS DOING IN THOSE
DISTRICTS? SO WHAT WE KNOW SO
WHAT WHAT THE I CAN'T SPEAK TO
EXACTLY HOW THOSE SCHOOLS AND
MAYBE I'M SORRY, THE STUDENTS IN
THOSE PARTICULAR DISTRICTS ARE
DOING WHAT I CAN SAY IS, IS THAT
THE DISTRICTS THAT ARE NOT
RECEIVING CONCENTRATION GRANTS
ARE NOT DOING AS WELL. AND IT'S
TOO BAD I DIDN'T ASK THIS AS
DOCTOR JOHNSON, BUT REALLY, I
HADN'T THOUGHT OF THIS QUESTION
UNTIL YOU'VE HELPED ILLUMINATE
THIS. BUT COULD IT ALSO BE THAT
THE SCHOOLS THAT ARE LESS THAN
55%, THE GROWTH ISN'T AS BIG
BECAUSE THEIR PERFORMANCE IS
ALREADY IS HIGHER THAN THE
STUDENTS WHO ARE IN THOSE
CONCENTRATION DISTRICTS. THERE
IS LESS GROWTH TO BE ACHIEVED
BECAUSE THOSE STUDENTS ARE
PERFORMING BETTER TO BEGIN WITH.
SO WHAT THIS IS LOOKING AT IS
PRE AND POST. SO WHAT YOU'RE
LOOKING AT AS WELL IS PRE AND
POST IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LCFF.
AND THAT ACTUALLY IS ALSO SO
WHAT THAT I THINK YOUR POINT IS
WELL TAKEN THAT IN FACT ACTUALLY
IT MAY NOT CAPTURE SORT OF THE
ISSUE OF GROWTH IN THAT REGARD,
BUT IT IS LOOKING AT WHAT THE
CHART SHOWS IS PRE AND POST
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FORMULA.
SO, SO WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT,
ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT EQUITY IN THESE TWO
PANELS, IS I UNDERSTAND THE THAT
FOR DISTRICTS, WHAT LCFF HAS
DONE IS PROVIDE THEM THE ABILITY
TO DO THINGS WITHOUT STRINGS
ATTACHED. ESSENTIALLY. AND WHY
THAT HAS BEEN A GOOD THING. BUT
WHERE I'M CONCERNED IS WHEN
THOSE DISTRICTS ARE NOT
INVESTING THOSE DOLLARS WITH THE
STUDENTS THAT NEED THEM. AND I'M
NOT SURE THAT THIS DATA IS
SHOWING US EXACTLY WHAT THAT
IMPACT IS ON THOSE SPECIFIC
STUDENTS. I BELIEVE YOU'RE
YOU'RE CORRECT ABOUT THAT. MAYBE
I'M LOOKING TO, JULIAN, THAT
WE'LL LET YOU ALL THINK ABOUT
THAT. I WANT TO HAVE MISS BONTA
GIVE HER AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE
I KNOW SHE SHE HAS TO ATTEND TO
ANOTHER MATTER, BUT I WANT TO
GIVE HER A CHANCE TO ASK YOUR
QUESTIONS, AND THEN I'LL
CONTINUE WITH THAT LINE OF
QUESTIONING. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. I ACTUALLY JUST WANT TO
ASK A BASIC QUESTION. SO ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT WE HEARD FROM
THE LAST TWO PANELS WAS THIS
OPEN QUESTION AROUND WHETHER OR
NOT WE SHOULD BE THINKING
DIFFERENTLY ABOUT THE
CONCENTRATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANTS IN PARTICULAR, BEING MORE
FOCUSED AT THE SITE LEVEL. AND
THEN WE ALSO HAD THIS
CONVERSATION AROUND AND BEING
ABLE TO HAVE SCHOOL DISTRICTS
DEMONSTRATE THAT THAT IS THE
CASE. AND THE ATTENDANT
CHALLENGES WITH THAT, BOTH FROM
A FISCAL ACCOUNTING PERSPECTIVE
AS WELL AS FROM JUST AN OVERALL
REPORTING PERSPECTIVE. SO FOR
THE PRACTITIONERS, THE
SUPERINTENDENTS HERE, CAN YOU
DESCRIBE A LITTLE THE PIECE THAT
I KNOW TO BE TRUE IS THAT, YOU
KNOW, GIVEN THAT 85% OF THE
RESOURCES ARE REALLY TOWARDS
PEOPLE, THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF
RESOURCES BEING SHARED ACROSS
PEOPLE, RESOURCES BEING SHARED
ACROSS MULTIPLE SCHOOLS. SO CAN
YOU JUST SHARE WITH US WHAT OUR
RESPONSES TO THIS OPEN QUESTION
THAT WE'RE ASKING AROUND WHETHER
OR NOT IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO BE
MORE, MORE SCHOOL SPECIFIC IN
THE OR CONTROLLED ABOUT AROUND
THE DIRECTIVE OF THE FUNDING.
YOU KNOW, I CAN GIVE I CAN GIVE
MY PERSPECTIVE FROM MODESTO CITY
SCHOOLS. I'LL TAKE THE FOCUS ON
EL FOR INSTANCE, BECAUSE I KNOW
YOU ASKED THAT QUESTION EARLIER
AROUND ENGLISH LEARNERS. IF WE
WERE TO PUT IT JUST AT THE
SCHOOL SITES, NOT JUST IF WE
WERE TO FOCUS IT AT SCHOOL
SITES, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE
COULD CAPITALIZE ON WHAT I SEE
IS THE GREATEST NEED, AND THAT
IS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. SO
AT OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, WE HAVE
A CURRICULUM PROFESSIONAL
CURRICULUM AND PROFESSIONAL
LEARNING DEPARTMENT. AND IN
THERE THERE'S EMBEDDED A L
DEPARTMENT. AND WITHIN THIS L
DEPARTMENT THERE'S FOUR
DIFFERENT COACHES. FOR L THERE'S
ALSO A LEVEL OF TRAINING FOR
PRINCIPALS TO SUPPORT TEACHERS
AND WHAT THEY SHOULD SEE IN THE
CLASS. THEY THEN ARE DEPLOYED
OUT TO SCHOOL SITES TO BE ABLE
TO HELP AND SUPPORT. HOWEVER,
THERE ALSO IS A DIRECT NEED FOR
INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL SITES. WHEN
YOU DO HAVE A CONCENTRATION OF
SPECIFIC LANGUAGES THAT ARE IT'S
NOT EASILY TRANSLATED. DON'T
HAVE A LOT OF TRANSLATORS FOR
INSTANCE, OUR AFGHANI, OUR
STUDENTS THAT ARE COMING IN
BECAUSE WE'RE A RESETTLEMENT
AREA IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY, WE
DO HAVE THAT ALL PRIMARILY AT A
ONE SCHOOL SITE. SO THEN WE
DEPLOY RESOURCES JUST AT THAT
ONE SCHOOL SITE THAT'S GOING TO
BE DIFFERENT THAN ANOTHER SCHOOL
SITE. SO I GUESS THE ANSWER IS
BOTH. YOU NEED YOU NEED TO BE
ABLE TO DO IT AT BOTH, JUST IN
TERMS OF THE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS. AGAIN. SO THE
PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE THE WAY
THAT WE STRUCTURED LCFF, WE
HEARD A LITTLE BIT AND I ALSO
KNOW TO BE THE CASE THAT THE
REPORTING AND THE KIND OF THE
CREATION OF THE LCAP IS A
PROCESS THAT IS INTENDED TO
INVOLVE MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS. I
APPRECIATE WANTING TO BE ABLE TO
OFFER FLEXIBILITY TO SCHOOL
DISTRICTS, AND AT THE SAME TIME
ALSO WANT TO KEEP THE REPORTING
DOWN TO SOMETHING THAT IS
ACHIEVABLE. THAT ALSO PROVIDES A
LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY. SO I'M
JUST WANTING TO PUSH IN A LITTLE
BIT MORE ON THIS IDEA OF
CONCENTRATION OF EFFORT AT THE
SCHOOL SITE. WHAT THE WHAT THE
CONS OF THAT ARE. I'LL JUST BE
TARGETED AT WHAT THE CONS OF
THAT ARE. AND, AND WHETHER IT
SHOULD OVERRIDE THE, THE NEED
FOR KIND OF HAVING
ACCOUNTABILITY AT THAT, AT THAT
GRANULAR LEVEL. I THINK WE'RE
BOTH GOING TO SHARE. SO I'LL GO
GO NEXT IF THAT'S OKAY. AND
THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
CERTAINLY I WOULD HAVE TO SHARE
THAT IN THE SAC STANDARDIZED
ACCOUNT CODE STRUCTURE. EACH OF
THE SACS CODES HAVE AN
IDENTIFIER OR A THREE DIGIT,
SOMETIMES FOUR DIGIT CODE FOR
LOCATION. LOCATION CAN BE A
SCHOOL SITE. SO I THINK THE DATA
MAY BE SKEWED. DISTRICT. YOU
KNOW HOW THE RESOURCES ARE BEING
SPENT DISTRICT WISE VERSUS
SCHOOL SITE WIDE. I THINK WE AS
A SCHOOL DISTRICT, WE COMMINGLE
THE TWO SO THAT WHAT WE FIRST DO
IS WE PULL ALL OF THE DATA FOR
OUR STUDENTS OF AT RISK
SUBGROUPS, AND THEN WE IDENTIFY
RESEARCH BASED PRACTICES THAT
WOULD BEST SUPPORT THOSE
STUDENTS. AND WE IDENTIFY THOSE
RESOURCES AND THOSE PROGRAMS AND
SERVICES WITHIN THE LCAP. AND
THAT LCAP HAS A SUPPLEMENTAL
SECTION FOR BOTH SUPPLEMENTAL
AND CONCENTRATION FUNDS THAT
CLEARLY DELINEATE HOW THOSE
FUNDING SOURCES ARE TARGETED FOR
THOSE SPECIFIC SUBGROUPS OF
STUDENTS. SO I DON'T WANT THERE
TO BE A MISUNDERSTANDING FROM A
DISTRICT FIELD LEVEL THAT WE'RE
NOT ALREADY DOING IT BECAUSE
WE'RE VERY CLEARLY REQUIRED IN
THE CALIFORNIA DASHBOARD TO
DISAGGREGATE THE DATA,
ESPECIALLY WITHIN OUR ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNERS. SO THERE IS
AN EL PROGRESS REPORT IN THE
DASHBOARD. AND THAT DASHBOARD,
FOR EXAMPLE, IN MY DISTRICT
SHOWS THAT ALMOST EVERY ONE OF
MY SCHOOLS HAVE REACHED
INCREASED LEVELS FOR ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNERS OF RATES OF
BLUES AND GREENS, WHICH IS ARE
THE CATEGORICAL COLOR CATEGORIES
OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS. SO
I THINK HOW WE REPORT THE DATA
AND HOW WE QUANTIFY IT IS, IS
IMPORTANT TO MAYBE BACK INTO
THAT A LITTLE MORE DEEPLY,
BECAUSE I THINK THE ASK OF
HAVING LOCAL CONTROL TO THE
DISTRICT LEVEL IS CRITICAL,
BECAUSE IF WE TURN AROUND AND
SHIFT THE MANNER IN WHICH THAT
FUNDING IS GOING TO SCHOOL
DISTRICTS, THEN SOME OF THE
PROGRAMS, LIKE OUR SCI FI
PROGRAM, WE HAVE A TEAM OF A
DOZEN TEACHERS THAT GO INTO EACH
OF OUR SCHOOLS. THEY TEACH
SCIENCE AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION,
WHICH THEY'RE IN TURN RELEASES
THE GENERAL EDUCATION TEACHER TO
CO COLLABORATE AND DISAGGREGATE
DATA FOR ANYWHERE FROM ONE HOUR
TO AN HOUR AND A HALF A WEEK IN
ORDER TO CREATE INTERVENTIONS
DURING THE REGULAR CLASSROOM. SO
HOW WE'RE DOING IT PROBABLY
NEEDS MORE EXPLANATION TO THE
LEGISLATURE SO THAT WE CAN
CLEARLY IDENTIFY WHAT THOSE
PROGRAMS LOOK LIKE, BECAUSE I
CAN SOUNDLY SAY FOR MY
COLLEAGUES AND I, THE PROGRAMS
ARE WORKING FOR STUDENTS. IT'S A
MATTER OF HOW YOU DELINEATE IT
IN THE SACS ACCOUNT CODE. AND
THERE IS A DISCRETE RESOURCE
CODE IF YOU WANT THERE TO BE ONE
IN SACS FOR SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION. WE JUST DON'T ALL
HAVE IT SYNCHRONIZED IN THAT WAY.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION.
I KEEP FEELING THAT I CAN DO A
PROS AND CONS ALMOST ON ON YOUR
QUESTION, AND HAVE ARGUMENTS FOR
BOTH SIDES. I'M MOSTLY THINKING
ABOUT THE MONITORING OF THE
STRATEGIES. SO WE HAVE THESE
REPORTS THAT WE DO MAYBE ONCE OR
TWICE A YEAR. AND THEY'RE VERY
MUCH WHAT HAPPENED LAST YEAR,
ESPECIALLY IF WE TALK ABOUT
ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT AND
ACQUISITION AND SO I THINK
PROVIDING PARTNERSHIP WITH
DISTRICT OFFICES IS ABOUT
MONITORING ONGOING LANGUAGE
ACQUISITION. AND SO THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY
IMPORTANT IS IF DOES THIS
STRATEGY ACTUALLY WORK? AND ARE
WE ACTUALLY SEEING IT WORK
THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, NOT JUST AT
THE END OF THE YEAR WHEN THE
KIDS ARE NO LONGER IN YOUR
CLASSROOM AND THEY'RE IN A
DIFFERENT CLASS? SO THAT'S A BIG
COMPONENT ABOUT THE PARTNERSHIP
AND THE IMPORTANCE OF SCHOOLS
AND DISTRICT FUNDED RESOURCES.
THE OTHER ONE THAT I WORRY
ABOUT, AND I DO WORRY, IS ABOUT
INNOVATION. THERE NEEDS TO BE
THOUGHT PARTNERSHIP OUTSIDE WITH
RESEARCHERS, WITH UNIVERSITIES.
AND SO AGAIN, IF IT'S JUST A
SCHOOL SITE, USUALLY AT A SCHOOL
SITE, WE'RE RUNNING THE DAILY
BUSINESS OF A SCHOOL. AND SO
IT'S THE PARTNERSHIP THAT
HAPPENS BOTH WITH DISTRICTS
OUTSIDE. AND I WILL GIVE YOU AN
EXAMPLE FOR OUR HIGH SCHOOL
STUDENTS THAT COME IN AS AN
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNER, MOST
OF THE TIME THEY HAVE TO TAKE
REMEDIAL CLASSES. AND SO THAT
HINDERS THEIR ABILITY TO TAKE
ELECTIVES OR FOLLOW A COLLEGE
AND CAREER PATHWAY. ONE OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT
NOW AT TWO DIFFERENT HIGH
SCHOOLS IS WE PARTNERED WITH UC
SAN DIEGO AND CREATED A COLLEGE
CAREER PATHWAY ABOUT A
TRANSLATION CERTIFICATE. SO
WE'RE ACTUALLY MAKING SURE THAT
OUR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
ARE SEEN AS BILINGUAL ASSETS AND
MAKING SURE THAT WHEN THEY LEAVE
OUR HIGH SCHOOLS, THEY'RE ALSO
CAREER READY WITH THE
TRANSLATION CERTIFICATE, SO THAT
WE SHOW THEM THAT WE VALUE THEIR
SECOND LANGUAGE, THAT IT'S
ACTUALLY THEY'RE ACQUIRING A
LANGUAGE FOR A VERY PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. AND THAT TYPE OF
INNOVATION DOESN'T NECESSARILY
HAPPEN WHEN IT'S JUST ROOTED AT
A SCHOOL SITE. AND SO AS DOCTOR
POTTER MENTIONED, THERE'S A LOT
OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN DISTRICT
WIDE THAT HELP US ACHIEVE THE
LEVELS OF ACHIEVEMENT THAT WE
HAVE. AND SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT
PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN SCHOOL SITE
AND DISTRICT. OKAY. THANK YOU,
MISS BONTA. APPRECIATE THAT. LET
ME NOW ASK SOMETHING. I HEARD
QUITE A BIT THE PREVIOUS PANEL.
AND IN THIS PANEL FROM THE
SUPERINTENDENTS IN PARTICULAR,
MEAL COUNTS. AND THAT NOT BEING
THE PROXY FOR STUDENT NEED, I'M
TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS
IS, WHAT THE ISSUE IS HERE AND
WHY THIS IS EITHER TOO
COMPLICATED OR TOO UNNECESSARY.
CAN YOU TRY TO SIMPLIFY THIS FOR
ME? ANYONE? THANK YOU. CHAIR.
ALVAREZ. SO THE MANNER IN WHICH
SCHOOL DISTRICTS RECEIVE FUNDING
FOR SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDS HAS TO
DO WITH THE DATA THAT WE INPUT
INTO COWPATS. SO COWPATS IS THE
UNIVERSAL DATA SYSTEM, AND THEY
TRACK THE SOCIOECONOMIC
PERCENTAGE BASED ON FOR MOST OF
OUR DISTRICTS, THE FREE AND
REDUCED MEAL APPLICATION. AND SO
MOST OF US WILL COLLECT THE FREE
AND REDUCED MEAL APPLICATION.
BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE SWITCHED TO
UNIVERSAL MEALS WHERE ALL
STUDENTS ARE EATING FOR FREE,
THE PARENTS DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY
THEY'RE COMPLETING THE FREE AND
REDUCED MEAL APPLICATION WHEN
THEIR STUDENT, WHETHER THEY
COMPLETE IT OR NOT, THEY'RE
GOING TO RECEIVE A FREE MEAL.
AND WHAT ARE WHAT ARE YOU? AS WE
HAD THIS ISSUE, IT'S SEPARATE
BUT RELATED. WHY ARE DISTRICTS
OR SCHOOLS NOT GETTING MORE
COMPLETED? FORMS THE WE SEND OUT
MULTIPLE MESSAGES AND WE CALL
FAMILIES TO PLEASE COMPLETE THE
FORM. BUT THE VALUE OF
COMPLETING THE FORM HAS
DIMINISHED BECAUSE WHETHER THEY
COMPLETE IT OR NOT, THEIR CHILD
WILL RECEIVE A FREE MEAL. SO THE
ONLY OTHER THING IS THAT NOW THE
STATE HAS ALLOWED AN ALTERNATIVE
MEAL APPLICATION FORM, AND THAT
TOO IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO
COMPLETE AND TO RECEIVE BACK
FROM THE FAMILIES, WHICH IS WHY
WE'RE PROPOSING AN ALTERNATIVE
METHOD OF COLLECTING THIS DATA
SO THAT THE FUNDING THAT WE
RECEIVE, NOT JUST FOR
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION,
BUT ALSO OUR FEDERAL FUNDS
TITLES ONE THROUGH FOUR, WILL BE
ACCURATE TO THE POPULATION AND
DEMOGRAPHIC OF CHILDREN THAT WE
SO AGAIN, WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO
THE HOW WE DO THAT. WHAT WOULD
YOU PROPOSE I THOUGHT I HEARD
EARLIER FROM THE OTHER SCHOOL
DISTRICT THAT THE NEW FORM MADE
IT SIMPLER TO COLLECT DATA AND
NOW HAS QUALIFIED THEM FOR
CONCENTRATION. SO IS THAT NOT
SIMPLE ENOUGH NOW FOR US? WE
INCORPORATE INCORPORATED IT INTO
OUR ENROLLMENT PROCESS RIGHT. SO
AS FAMILIES GO ONLINE, IT'S ONE
OF THE LINE ITEMS THAT THEY MUST
COMPLETE. THEY CAN DECLINE TO
STATE BUT THEY MUST COMPLETE IT.
AND THAT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT FOR
EVERY DISTRICT. YOU DON'T
REQUIRE THAT ALL YOUR FAMILIES
MUST COMPLETE THAT. IN SAN
DIEGO. YES. AND ACTUALLY THIS
YEAR WE CREATED EVEN DATA
DASHBOARDS BY SCHOOLS ABOUT HOW
MANY LCFF FORMS WE WANTED TO DO
SOME HEALTHY COMPETITION ACROSS
OUR SCHOOL SITES. BUT THEN ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID IS WE
LOOKED AT HOW MANY APPLICATIONS
WEREN'T FILLED OUT AND HOW MANY
OF THOSE FAMILIES HAVE QUALIFIED
IN THE PAST. AND THEN WE
ACTUALLY WENT IN AND STARTED
CALLING THEM MORE STRATEGIC
OUTREACH, REALLY. I MEAN, BUT
THAT WAS ACTUALLY WHEN WE SAW
HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE NOT
RESPONDING. WE THOUGHT, WELL,
LET'S TAKE A LOOK TO SEE IF
THEY'VE EVER QUALIFIED AND THEN
LET'S TARGET THEM BEFORE WE DO A
WHOLE TARGET. WE FIGURED A
PERSONALIZATION OF THAT WOULD BE
EASIER. OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE
ANY THOUGHTS ON MY PRIOR
QUESTION ON THE ISSUE OF THE
CONCENTRATION AND REACHING THE
STUDENT POPULATION THAT NEEDS
NEEDS IT WAS THERE ANY
ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ANYBODY WANT
TO PROVIDE OVER HERE? YEAH, I
GUESS ONE. AND THIS IS TO YOUR
EARLIER QUESTION AND MAYBE SOME
OF THE TRYING TO INTERPRET THE
FINDINGS ON DOCTOR JOHNSON'S
GRAPH A LITTLE BIT. ONE PIECE OF
DATA THAT I CAN ADD IS, WHICH IS
MAYBE WHY WE'VE SEEN THIS
RELATIVELY FLAT. SO NOT AS MUCH
OF A DIFFERENTIAL GAIN FOR THOSE
STUDENTS IN KIND OF THE MIDDLE
OF THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE
DISTRICTS THAT ARE IN THE MIDDLE
OF THE DISTRIBUTION, 20, 30, 40,
50% HIGH NEED IS THAT SPENDING
ACTUALLY FOR THE KIND OF 0 TO
30% HIGH NEED DISTRICTS WENT UP
BY AS MUCH AS IT DID IN THE 30
TO 50% HIGH NEED DISTRICTS. IF
YOU LOOK AT THE YEAR BEFORE LCFF
AND COMPARE IT TO JUST TWO YEARS
AGO, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT IS
IN PART BECAUSE THOSE DISTRICTS
AREN'T GETTING AS MUCH IN
SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING. AND PART
OF THAT IS BECAUSE DISTRICTS
THAT ARE RELATIVELY LOWER NEED
CAN SOMETIMES RELY ON COMMUNITY
RESOURCES, LIKE PARCEL TAXES TO
GET ADDITIONAL FUNDING. I THINK
THAT'S WHAT CARRIE WAS GETTING
AT WITH KIND OF THIS U-SHAPED,
WHERE YOU ACTUALLY SEE SOME OF
THE LOWEST NEED DISTRICTS OR THE
DISTRICTS WITH THE FEWEST HIGH
NEED STUDENTS IN THE STATE CAN
ACTUALLY DRAW MAYBE ON COMMUNITY
RESOURCES IN A WAY THAT THOSE IN
THE MIDDLE CAN'T DRAW ON. AND SO
AS A RESULT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT
SURPRISING THAT WE'VE SEEN
ROUGHLY AT LEAST PRE-PANDEMIC,
WE SAW ROUGHLY SIMILAR TRENDS IN
TEST SCORES AMONG STUDENTS AND
THOSE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, TOP
QUARTILE VERSUS THE MIDDLE
QUARTILE OF DISTRICTS. WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE OF STUDENT
GROUPS. CERTAINLY, SPECIAL
EDUCATION WAS A THEME THROUGHOUT
THE DAY. I THINK THERE'S
SOMETHING THERE FOR SURE. BUT
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT OTHER OTHER
NEEDS. I GUESS THE QUESTION
WOULD BE IS WHAT ARE SOME OF THE
OTHER SPECIFIC STUDENT GROUPS
AND THE NEEDS THAT THEY HAVE
THAT WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT
GOING FORWARD AS IT RELATES TO
CONCENTRATION FUNDING? I DON'T
KNOW IF ANYBODY WHO HASN'T HAD A
CHANCE TO SAY SOMETHING YOU'D
LIKE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT.
YEAH, I WOULD JUST REITERATE
WHAT I SHARED IN TERMS OF
ADDRESSING RACIAL EQUITY GAPS. I
THINK THAT THERE ARE CHALLENGES
BASED ON THE LIMITATIONS OF PROP
209 TO DOING THAT DIRECTLY IN
LAW AND DEVELOPING RACE
CONSCIOUS POLICY. HOWEVER, I
THINK THAT THERE'S WAYS TO
IDENTIFY CERTAIN MARKERS OF
SYSTEMIC RACIAL DISPARITY THAT
IMPACT STUDENT GROUPS BY RACE,
PARTICULARLY BLACK STUDENTS AND
INDIGENOUS STUDENTS. THAT CAN BE
CONSIDERED A PART OF THE FORMULA
OR CONSIDERED COST FACTORS SO
THAT BOTH THOSE STUDENTS ARE
GENERATING ADDITIONAL REVENUE.
SO WHAT WOULD THOSE BE? I MEAN,
WE KNOW PROP 209. WE KNOW THE,
YOU KNOW, L.A. UNIFIED JUST HAD
AN ISSUE WITH THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT THAT SORT OF CHANGED
THAT AS WELL. SO WHAT ARE THE
WHAT ARE THE FACTORS? SO
ACTUALLY LAUSD ALSO USES SOME OF
THESE FACTORS AND HOW THEY
DISTRIBUTE FUNDS ACROSS THEIR
SCHOOL SITES. SO THEY LOOK AT
THINGS LIKE RATES OF COVID CASES,
RATES OF ASTHMA, RATES OF GUN
VIOLENCE, WHICH ARE DIRECTLY
CONNECTED AND ATTRIBUTABLE TO
RACIAL SYSTEMIC INEQUITIES. IN
ORDER TO DISTRIBUTE THEIR
FUNDING FROM THE DISTRICT LEVEL
TO THE SCHOOL LEVEL, IS THAT IS
THAT IS THAT UNIQUE TO L.A.
UNIFIED? AS FAR AS I'M AWARE,
THEY'RE THE ONLY DISTRICT THAT
I'VE KNOWN THAT HAVE
INCORPORATED THOSE TYPES OF
MARKERS OF DISPARITY IN HOW THEY
DISTRIBUTE FUNDS TO THIS. AND
WHAT RESEARCH DO WE HAVE OR DO
WE HAVE ANY SO FAR? I DON'T KNOW
WHEN THEY STARTED TO IMPLEMENT
THAT ON THE IMPACT OF THAT. I
DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S DIRECT
RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT, BUT I DO
KNOW THAT IT'S ANECDOTALLY IT'S
CHANGED BEHAVIORS OF SCHOOL SITE
LEADERS SO THAT THEY'RE THINKING
ABOUT THOSE TYPES OF FACTORS AND
INCORPORATING THEM TO
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S BONTA'S POINT,
WE HAVE TO THINK DIFFERENTLY
ABOUT HOW WE DELIVER INSTRUCTION
BASED ON THE THINGS THAT
STUDENTS EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCED
DAY TO DAY, AND KEEPING THOSE
FACTORS IN MIND AS YOU'RE
DELIVERING INSTRUCTION,
ANECDOTALLY, WE'VE HEARD HAS
MADE AN IMPACT. OKAY, DO DO ANY
OF THE SUPERINTENDENTS WANT TO
SHARE ABOUT MY QUESTION ON WHAT
STUDENT GROUPS FACTORS SHOULD WE
BE PERHAPS LOOKING TO IN THE
NEXT VERSION OF WHAT WE DO WITH
CONCENTRATION, FUNDING? I HAVE A
LITTLE BIT OF SOMETHING TO SAY,
AND I ACTUALLY REALLY
APPRECIATED MY COLLEAGUE FROM
ADDRESS WEST BRINGING UP THE
RACE POINT, BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK
AT SAN DIEGO UNIFIED DATA JUST
FROM THIS LAST GASP,
STANDARDIZED TESTING DATA, OUR
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES AND
OUR SOCIOECONOMIC DISADVANTAGED
STUDENTS ALL PRETTY MUCH WENT UP
ACROSS EVERY GRADE LEVEL FOR
MATH AND ELA. BUT WHEN I LOOK AT
LATINO STUDENTS OR WHEN I LOOK
AT BLACK STUDENTS, THEY DID NOT.
AND SO WE HAVE TO HAVE REALLY
SPECIFIC EFFORTS TO ORDER TO IN
ORDER TO SUPPORT THOSE
POPULATIONS. AND SO OUR EQUITY
DEPARTMENT DID BUILD OUT TWO
DIFFERENT SCHOLAR PLANS, A BLACK
SCHOLAR PLAN AND A LATINO
SCHOLAR PLAN. AND WE'RE
DEVELOPING MICRO-CREDENTIALS FOR
TEACHERS TO COME AND RECEIVE
PROFESSIONAL LEARNING ABOUT BEST
RESEARCH BASED PRACTICES FOR
THESE STUDENT POPULATIONS. AND
SO AND WE'RE ALSO MAKING SURE
THAT WE HAVE STUDENT LEADERSHIP.
WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT HAVING
STUDENT LEADERSHIP WITH THOSE
TWO STUDENT GROUPS GOES A LONG
WAY. AND MORE PARENT ENGAGEMENT.
AND SO THOSE ARE A FEW OF THE
STRATEGIES THAT WE'RE USING. BUT
WE'RE DEFINITELY NOTICING THAT
LCFF RIGHT WHERE OUR
CONCENTRATION FUNDS STUDENTS
WITH DISABILITIES, SOCIOECONOMIC
WE SAW GROWTH. AND YET WE STILL
HAVE TWO POPULATIONS THAT WE
REALLY NEED TO TAKE CARE OF.
WHAT ABOUT THE POPULATION OF THE
HOMELESS? THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
I HEAR A LOT IN THROUGHOUT THE
STATE FROM A LOT OF MY
COLLEAGUES. AND I KNOW DOCTOR
POTTER MENTIONED IN HER
STATISTICS SPECIFICALLY. SO I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SHARE
THAT, BUT ANY ONE WHO'S DEALING
WITH THIS INCREASE IN HOMELESS
POPULATION AND IS THAT
WORTHWHILE OF OUR FOCUS AND
CONCENTRATION. YEAH. THANK YOU,
CHAIR, FOR ASKING THE QUESTION.
AND BECAUSE OUR DISTRICT HAS ONE
OF THE HIGHEST POPULATIONS OF
UNHOUSED OR HOMELESS YOUTH IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, I WOULD
SAY ABSOLUTELY. THE
MCKINNEY-VENTO FEDERAL GRANT
FUNDS HAVE REDUCED TO $80 PER
STUDENT. AND BECAUSE OF THAT,
THERE SIMPLY IS NOT ENOUGH FUNDS
TO TAKE CARE OF THE WHOLE CHILD.
A CHILD WHO'S HOMELESS NEEDS A
FULL SPECTRUM OF A WHOLE CHILD,
NEED SUPPORTS FOR THEM AND THEIR
FAMILY. THEY COULD BE LIVING IN
A VEHICLE. THEY COULD BE LIVING
AT A HOTEL, YOU KNOW, NEAR THE
SCHOOL DISTRICT. THEY COULD BE
LIVING IN A GARAGE OF A FAMILY'S
HOME OR A NEIGHBOR'S HOME OR A
FRIEND'S HOME. AND WHAT I FIND
IS THAT NOT ONLY ARE THEY COMING
TO SCHOOL HUNGRY BECAUSE THEY'RE
COMING LATE AND THEY MISS
BREAKFAST, SO THANKFULLY THEY'RE
GETTING LUNCH FOR FREE, BUT
THEY'RE ALSO COMING WITH SHOES
WITH THEIR TOES, YOU KNOW, KIND
OF POPPING OUT OF THEIR SHOES.
AND THEY'RE COMING WHERE THEY
DON'T HAVE BASIC NEEDS OF
SHAMPOO AND SOAP AND A BACKPACK
FOR SCHOOL AND SCHOOL SUPPLIES.
SO HAD OUR HOMELESS LIAISON NOT
PARTNERED WITH 40 OTHER AGENCIES
FROM, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES TO THE
FOOD SHELTERS IN TOWN THERE.
THERE'S JUST A GREAT NEED AND
TAKING CARE OF THE WHOLE CHILD.
IT'S REALLY HARD FOR A CHILD TO
LEARN AND TO REMEMBER WHAT
THEY'VE LEARNED WHEN THEIR
CLOTHES AREN'T QUITE RIGHT AND
THEIR SHOES AREN'T RIGHT, AND
MAYBE THEY NEED GLASSES. SO I
DEFINITELY THINK THAT THE
HOMELESS COUNT IN THE
CONCENTRATION AND SUPPLEMENTAL
FACTOR AND FORMULA SHOULD BE
SHOULD NOT BE AN UNDUPLICATED
COUNT, BUT RATHER A DUPLICATED
COUNT OR AN ADD ON. ONE OR THE
OTHER, I BELIEVE, WOULD WORK,
BUT SOMETHING DOES NEED TO
HAPPEN FOR THESE CHILDREN. AND
IT'S SAD TO SEE HOW THEY'RE
LIVING AND IT'S HEARTBREAKING,
BUT I'M APPLAUDING THE CHAMPIONS
OF MY DISTRICT AND OTHERS LIKE
MY DISTRICT AND MY NEIGHBORS
HERE FOR GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND
AND TO REACHING ALSO INTO OUR
OWN POCKETS TO HELP THE CHILDREN
THAT WE'RE SERVING IN THIS
SITUATION. SO LET'S JUST THINK
TOWARDS THE FUTURE A LITTLE BIT.
AND, YOU KNOW, THE CONCEPT THAT
WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER WITH THE
PREVIOUS PANEL THAT VARIOUS
VARIOUS OF US ASKED ABOUT THE
DECLINING ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND, A
VERY INTERESTING CONCEPT. AND IT
WAS BOTH TO YOU KNOW, TO THE
BASE AND ALSO CONCENTRATION,
SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING. SO LET'S
JUST SAY IF THERE WAS SUCH A
DIVIDEND IN THE FUTURE AND YOU
AN ADDITIONAL $1,000 JUST TO BE
ROUND, YOU KNOW, GIVE ROUND
NUMBERS AND TO THINK OUT LOUD A
LITTLE BIT TO SPECIFICALLY TO
ADDRESS ADDRESS EQUITY ISSUES IN
A FRAMEWORK THAT IS THAT IS
LEGAL GIVEN LIMITATIONS. MAYBE A
QUICK FIRE FROM EACH OF YOU.
WHERE DO YOU THINK IT WOULD BE
BEST UTILIZED IN YOUR DISTRICT'S
CASE? START HERE IN OUR
DISTRICT. I THINK IT WOULD BE
WITH OUR STUDENTS WITH
DISABILITIES. THE NEEDS OF
DIFFERENT EQUIPMENT AND
DIFFERENT SUPPORTS ARE JUST
GREAT IN OUR DISTRICT. WE WOULD
DEFINITELY USE THAT. THANK YOU.
WE INVEST A LOT IN EARLY
LEARNING AND ALSO IN OUR HIGH
SCHOOL GRADUATION WITH OUR UK 3D
DIPLOMA. MIDDLE SCHOOL WOULD BE
THE TARGET FOR THAT AGE GROUP
THAT IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPING
THEIR IDENTITY AND ARE USUALLY
FAR BEHIND. THEY REALLY NEED
EXTRA SUPPORT. OKAY, IN OUR
DISTRICT IT WOULD BE TWO GROUPS.
OUR HOMELESS STUDENTS ENDURING
HOMELESSNESS AND ALSO OUR
STUDENTS WHO HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS.
OKAY. AND I THINK THE FOCUS ON
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT,
MENTORING AND COACHING TO
SUPPORT THE ADULTS IN THE
SYSTEM, TO SUPPORT THE STUDENTS
IN THE CLASSROOM. I THINK THAT
THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD FOCUS,
BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SUCH A LARGE
NEED IN OUR DISTRICT AS FAR AS
THE SCOPE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE,
YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT A SPECIFIC
STUDENT GROUP. I WOULD SAY THE
HOMELESS.
BE ONE TO BE PAYING CLOSE
ATTENTION TO, AND BUT I ALSO
THANK YOU. I AGREE, I WOULD ALSO
SAY DUPLICATED COUNTS AND
LOOKING AT A WAY TO
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN, YOU KNOW,
EXTREME POVERTY VERSUS NEAR
POVERTY VERSUS SLIGHTLY ABOVE.
AND ONE DATA POINT QUICKLY, I'LL
JUST ADD ON ON HOMELESSNESS AS
WELL, BECAUSE I FULLY AGREE.
WHEN WE LOOK AT L CAPS, EVEN
THOUGH HOMELESS STUDENTS ARE
CLASSIFIED AS LOW INCOME
STUDENTS, LCAP SEPARATELY REPORT
OUT ACTIONS FOR HOMELESS
STUDENTS SOMETIMES, BUT THAT WE
FOUND THAT THAT ONLY HAPPENED
ABOUT 7% OF THE TIME, AND THAT
REPRESENTED LESS THAN 1% OF
TOTAL LCFF FUNDING. SO THERE
AREN'T A LOT OF THESE EXAMPLES,
AT LEAST WRITTEN ON L CAPS RIGHT
NOW OF SPECIFIC ACTIONS THAT ARE
USED, YOU KNOW, THAT ARE KIND OF
GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE MORE
GENERAL ACTIONS FOR HIGH NEED
STUDENTS. AND IN PART, YOU KNOW,
THAT REFLECTS THE FACT THAT IT'S
AN UNDUPLICATED AND NOT A
DUPLICATED COUNT FOR THIS
CATEGORY OF NEED. THANK YOU.
YEAH, I WOULD AGREE WITH THE
DUPLICATED COUNTS AMONGST THE
FOUR EXISTING CATEGORIES WITHIN
THE SUPPLEMENTAL LOW INCOME L
FOSTER AND HOMELESS. THE OTHER
THING I THINK WILL BE IMPORTANT
IF THAT ENROLLMENT, THE
DECLINING ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND
FUND COMES TO PASS, IS THAT WE
DON'T CREATE INCENTIVES FOR
DISTRICTS TO MAINTAIN
DISECONOMIES OF SCALE. THAT IS,
THERE WILL STILL BE SHRINKING
ENROLLMENT AND UNDERUTILIZED
SPACES, AND WE DON'T WANT TO
STRETCH OUR EXISTING FUNDING AND
INCREASE FUNDING OUT ACROSS
THOSE SPACES WITHOUT ALSO
CREATING OPPORTUNITIES TO
CONSOLIDATE AND SUPPORT A
SMALLER FOOTPRINT. OKAY. I THINK
I WOULD REITERATE WHAT OUR MY
COLLEAGUES HAVE SHARED FOCUSING
THOSE DOLLARS ON EXPANDING THE
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
GRANT SO THAT THAT FUNDING IS
DIRECTED TOWARDS THE STUDENTS
THAT EXPERIENCE THE HIGHEST
LEVEL OF DISPARITY, MAKES THE
MOST SENSE TO ME, BUT IT'S HARD
TO GIVE AN ANSWER TO THAT
WITHOUT SPEAKING TO THE NEED OF
THINKING INTENTIONALLY ABOUT HOW
THE DOLLARS ARE SPENT, NOT JUST
HAVING THE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS.
CORRECT. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE
ALL OF YOU RESPONDING TO THAT.
AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER
NOW TO CHAIRMAN MURATSUCHI.
THANK YOU. SO FOLLOWING ON THAT,
THAT QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK
THE RESEARCHERS. THE EASY
QUESTION, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IF
YOU WANT TO DUPLICATE FUNDING
FOR THE ENGLISH LEARNERS AND THE
LOW INCOME STUDENTS, WHERE DID
THAT MONEY COME FROM AND HOW
WOULD YOU ADDRESS THE CONCERNS
OF ADEQUACY FOR DISTRICTS THAT
DON'T HAVE A LARGE POPULATION OF
LOW INCOME AND ENGLISH LEARNERS?
SO I SPOKE EARLIER TO SOME OF
THE PLACES THE FUNDING COULD
COME FROM. THERE ARE ADD ON
FEATURES IN LCFF AND OUTSIDE OF
LCFF THAT COULD BE CONSOLIDATED
INTO THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT IN
ORDER TO DO THE DUPLICATION.
THERE IS A LOT OF STATE MONEY
OUTSIDE OF THE LCFF. I MEAN,
IT'S ONE THING WE HAVEN'T TALKED
ABOUT TODAY, BUT WE ARE
PRESUMING THAT STATE FUNDING IS
ALL GOING THROUGH LCFF WHEN
THAT'S ACTUALLY NOT THE CASE.
AND WE COULD STRENGTHEN THE LCFF
PROPOSITION OR EVEN RETURN TO
WHERE WE STARTED. THE ADA BASED
FUNDING FORMULA IS ANOTHER PLACE
THAT WE COULD LOOK BY SWITCHING
TO ENROLLMENT BASED FUNDING,
THERE WOULD BE UP WELL, THIS
WOULD BE A COST TO THE STATE. SO
IT'S MORE OF A REDISTRIBUTION
APPROACH. BUT THAT WOULD BE ONE
PLACE TO LOOK. I THINK THOSE ARE
THE PRIMARY PLACES IN TERMS OF
YOUR OTHER QUESTION, I MIGHT
DEFER TO ONE OF MY OTHER
PANELISTS. I MEAN, JUST TO
FOLLOW UP ON THAT BEFORE I TURN
TO THE OTHERS, I MEAN, I KNOW
THAT THIS ADA VERSUS ENROLLMENT
FUNDING ISSUE, AGAIN, IT IT
SEEMS TO PRESUPPOSE THAT, YOU
KNOW, THE DISTRICTS THAT THAT
HAVE, YOU KNOW, HIGHER
ENROLLMENT NUMBERS ARE SOMEHOW
FLUSH IN SCHOOL FUNDING. AND I
THINK THAT'S AT THE HEART OF A
LOT OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
IS, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE NOT
TALKING ABOUT NON PROPOSITION
$98, THEN IT BECOMES A
REDISTRIBUTION QUESTION. AND YOU
KNOW I YOU KNOW, I MEAN WE HEARD
EARLIER FROM FROM TORRANCE
UNIFIED I MEAN THEY'RE THEY'RE
40% UNDUPLICATED. YOU KNOW AND
THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW THEY DON'T
HAVE THE ADEQUATE FUNDING TO
MEET A LOT OF THEIR NEEDS. AND
THEY HAD TO REDIRECT, YOU KNOW,
ESSER AND OTHER FUNDS IN ORDER
TO SUPPLEMENT THE INADEQUATE
BASE GRANTS. AND SO, YOU KNOW,
WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU
KNOW, THE, THE ENROLLMENT
FUNDING MODEL OR WHETHER WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW,
DUPLICATING, YOU KNOW, LOW
INCOME AND ENGLISH LEARNERS, YOU
KNOW, YEAH, I JUST WANT TO, YOU
KNOW, ASK THE QUESTION. I MEAN,
IF THE FUNDING IS WITHIN THE
PROPOSITION 98 POT, THEN YOU
KNOW, HOW DO YOU DO THAT AT THE
APPARENT, YOU KNOW, SACRIFICE OF
DISTRICTS? WHO ARE YOU KNOW,
ALSO COMPLAINING ABOUT
INADEQUATE FUNDING. AND I THINK
WE GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL
LESSONS OF LCFF, WHICH IS THAT
WE DON'T CREATE WINNERS AND
LOSERS AND MOVE FUNDING AROUND.
WE WAIT UNTIL THERE'S REVENUE
GROWTH AND THEN INVEST THE NEW
REVENUE INTO THAT NEW STRATEGY.
THE REALITY IS THAT DISTRICTS
WITH HIGH CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM
ARE NOT GENERATING THE FULL 20%
PLUS A CONCENTRATION GRANT FOR
EACH OF THEIR LOW INCOME
STUDENTS. IF THOSE STUDENTS ARE
SUFFERING FROM EXTREME CHRONIC
ABSENTEEISM. ESSENTIALLY, WE
HAVE A REGRESSIVE FEATURE IN OUR
FUNDING FORMULA THAT CUTS
AGAINST A PROGRESSIVE FEATURE,
DILUTING ITS IMPACT. SO I THINK
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE
PACKAGE OF FISCAL FORMULAS THAT
TOGETHER MAKE UP OUR FUNDING
SYSTEM AND SEE HOW THEY INTERACT
WITH EACH OTHER. OKAY. I DON'T
THINK I DON'T HAVE TOO MUCH TO
ADD TO THAT. I PRETTY MUCH AGREE
WITH WHAT KARI SAID. THE ONLY
THING THAT I'LL SAY IS, YOU
KNOW, AGAIN, IF WE HAVE A FIXED
PIE PROP, YOU KNOW, PROP $98,
THEN IT IS TRUE THAT ANY SWITCH
TO DUPLICATION IS GOING TO I'M
SORRY, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE
MIC? YEAH. IS ANY SWITCH TO
DUPLICATION IS GOING TO CHANGE,
YOU KNOW, THE DISTRIBUTION AND
COULD LEAD TO SOME WINNERS AND
LOSERS. NOW, WHAT WE DID WITH
LCFF WAS WE PHASED THAT IN AND
THAT WAS A PERIOD OF REVENUE
GROWTH IN A WAY, YOU KNOW,
WITHOUT EXPECTING FUTURE REVENUE
GROWTH. SO WE DO HAVE THIS
DECLINING ENROLLMENT DIVIDEND
THAT THEY THAT YOU KNOW, AS IT
WAS KIND OF MENTIONED EARLIER.
AND THAT LEADS TO AN OPPORTUNITY
AS THE SYSTEM GETS SMALLER. BUT
AS THE STATE BUDGET HOPEFULLY
CONTINUES TO GROW AND WE COULD
HAVE MORE RESOURCES PER CHILD,
THAT COULD BE A WAY TO DIRECT
REDIRECT SOME OF THOSE INTO A
NEW FORMULA. SO I THINK THAT
WOULD PROBABLY BE, YOU KNOW,
ABSENT SOME NEW LARGE,
SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF REVENUE
STATEWIDE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE
THE, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE MAIN
MECHANISMS TO CONSIDER AND IN A
PHASED IN WAY, IT WOULD BE
DOABLE. I DON'T HAVE REALLY MUCH
TO ADD TO WHAT'S BEEN SAID HERE.
I THINK THAT WE BUT BUT WHAT HAS
BEEN SAID IS IMPORTANT TO
REFLECT UPON. THERE ARE OTHER
POTS OF DOLLARS THAT MAY NOT BE
EFFECTIVELY BEING AS USED AS
THEY COULD. THAT'S ONE RESOURCE.
THE OTHER IS THIS. THIS
THEORETICAL DIVIDEND, WHICH IS
IMPORTANT TO BE THINKING ABOUT
OVER TIME, AND THAT THE GROWTH
IN PROP 98 IS NOT SOMETHING TO
BE MIS MISUSED, THAT WE NEED TO
BE THINKING HARD ABOUT THE FACT
THAT THERE IS THAT WE WILL
PROBABLY BE SEEING GROWTH IN 98
FUNDING AND ALSO THE ISSUES
ABOUT ENROLLMENTS IN RELATION TO
THAT. SO THOSE ARE ALL THINGS TO
BE CONSIDERING AS WE AS WE THINK
ABOUT RESOURCES AND WHERE
THEY'LL COME FROM. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. I JUST WOULD WANT TO
REITERATE WHAT CAME UP A FEW
TIMES TODAY ACROSS THE PANELS IS
THAT, AGAIN, CALIFORNIA IS A
VERY WEALTHY STATE. AND IN
COMPARISON TO THE AMOUNT OF
ECONOMIC STRENGTH THAT WE HAVE,
WE ARE NOT INVESTING IN OUR
EDUCATION SYSTEM AT THE LEVEL I
BELIEVE WE SHOULD. AND IN
COMPARISON TO OTHER STATES THAT
DON'T HAVE AS STRONG OF AN
ECONOMY. SO TO ME, THESE ISSUES
OF ADEQUACY DON'T HAVE TO BE
ZERO SUM. I THINK THAT WE SHOULD
JUST, YOU KNOW, TAKE IT UPON
OURSELVES AND, AND CALL ON OUR
LEADERS TO ELEVATE THE NEED TO
GENERATE ADDITIONAL REVENUE FOR
EDUCATION. OKAY, I MEAN, I YEAH,
I'M ALL FOR, YOU KNOW, INCREASED
FUNDING FOR, FOR K-12 EDUCATION.
I DON'T SEE ANY REPUBLICAN
COLLEAGUES ON THE, ON THIS
PANEL. BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I,
I WOULD YOU KNOW, REMIND US ALL
THAT THAT CALIFORNIA DOES, YOU
KNOW, HAVE AMONG THE HIGHEST
TAXES IN THE COUNTRY AND. YEAH.
AND SO I'M SURE THAT WOULD BE AN
ARGUMENT THAT'S RAISED THAT WE
ALREADY ARE A HIGH TAX STATE,
WHICH WOULD RAISE THE QUESTION
OF, YOU KNOW, WHETHER WE SHOULD
BE REDISTRIBUTING, YOU KNOW, THE
STATE PIE. YOU KNOW, TO, TO
SPEND MORE ON, ON, ON K-12
EDUCATION. BUT WITHOUT GOING
DOWN THAT ROAD. MR. YOU
MENTIONED EARLIER THAT I THINK I
HEARD YOU SAY THAT THAT LOW
INCOME SCHOOL SIDES HAVE LESS
EXPERIENCE THAN MORE EMERGENCY
CREDENTIAL. TEACHERS. YEAH. SO
THE STAT I WAS MENTIONING WAS
FROM A REPORT WE DID ACTUALLY
PRE-PANDEMIC. AND IT WAS LOOKING
AT THE DISTRIBUTION OF STAFFING
RESOURCES ACROSS SCHOOLS, SITES
WITHIN THE SAME DISTRICT. AND SO
WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE LOOKED AT
SPENDING ON TEACHERS AND OTHER
CERTIFICATED STAFF WAS THAT IT
TENDED TO BE THE CASE THAT
DISTRICTS WOULD ACTUALLY SPEND
SOMEWHAT PROGRESSIVELY, THEY'D
SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE ON
TEACHERS AND THEIR STAFF IN
HIGHER NEED, HIGHER POVERTY
SCHOOL SITES. BUT THEN IF YOU
LOOKED AT THE AVERAGE TEACHER
SALARY, IT WAS MUCH LOWER IN
THOSE SITES. AND SO THE
DISCREPANCY THERE WAS THAT THERE
WERE HIGHER CLASS SIZES AND LOW
POVERTY SCHOOLS AND SMALLER
CLASS SIZES IN HIGH POVERTY
SCHOOLS. ANOTHER WAY OF THINKING
ABOUT IT IS THE HIGH POVERTY
SCHOOL SITE. WITHIN A DISTRICT
WOULD HAVE MORE ADULTS, MORE
STAFF, MORE EDUCATORS, BUT THEY
WOULD BE LOWER CREDENTIALED,
LOWER PAID, LESS EXPERIENCED. ON
AVERAGE. SO THAT MAY LOOK LIKE
WHEN WE LOOK IN THE SPENDING
DATA, IT MAY LOOK LIKE AN EQUAL
OR EQUITABLE OR EVEN PROGRESSIVE
DISTRIBUTION, DEPENDING ON THE
DISTRICT AND HOW YOU WANT TO
DEFINE THAT. BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW,
EVEN ON AN EQUALIZING ON A PER
DOLLAR LEVEL CAN MEAN A
DIFFERENT DISTRIBUTION OF TO
KIND OF PUT IT COARSELY,
QUANTITY AND QUALITY OF STAFF.
SO I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
ELEMENT TO CONSIDER. YOU KNOW,
MOVING FORWARD IN THE FORMULA IS
WE CAN EQUALIZE AND WE CAN
TARGET DOLLARS AND WE CAN
PROGRESSIVELY ALLOCATE, YOU
KNOW, ACROSS DISTRICTS. AND THEN
MAYBE EVEN WITHIN DISTRICTS. BUT
THESE STAFFING PATTERNS HAVE
BEEN FAIRLY RIGID OVER TIME,
WHERE IT TENDS TO BE THAT WE SEE
THE MOST EXPERIENCED STAFF, YOU
KNOW, EITHER MOVE TO OR HAVE
HIGHER RATES OF RETENTION IN THE
MOST AFFLUENT SCHOOLS, AND THAT
OPERATES ACROSS DISTRICTS AS
WELL AS WITHIN DISTRICTS. OKAY.
AND SO WITH THAT OBSERVATION, I
WANTED TO TURN THAT OVER TO THE
SUPERINTENDENTS. I MEAN, YOU
KNOW, MAYBE, MAYBE STARTING WITH
YOU KNOW, THE WHAT DID THE
DOCTOR DARLING-HAMMOND SAY THE
TOP PERFORMING URBAN DISTRICT IN
THE COUNTRY WOULD YOU AGREE WITH
THAT, THAT ASSESSMENT THAT YOU
HAVE MORE PEOPLE BUT LESS
EXPERIENCED, LESS CREDENTIALED
TEACHERS WORKING IN YOUR YOUR
HIGHEST NEEDS SCHOOLS, SCHOOL
SITES? I DON'T HAVE THAT
DISTINCT DATA SET. BUT WHAT I
ALSO KNOW IS THAT WHEN THERE'S A
REALLY GOOD PRINCIPAL AT THOSE
SCHOOL SITES, MUCH LIKE THE
RESEARCHERS SPOKE EARLIER, THAT
WE DON'T HAVE, THAT WE DON'T
HAVE THE TEACHER ATTRITION MODEL
THAT THAT HAPPENS. AND SO I DO
WANT TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TO BE
VERY CAREFUL ABOUT WHO WE HIRE
TO LEAD THOSE SCHOOLS. THAT HAS
BEEN A LINCHPIN FOR OVERALL
TEACHER RETENTION, TEACHER
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, GROWTH
AND DEVELOPMENT AT A SCHOOL SITE
MATTERS. AND I'VE SEEN THAT
TREND, BUCK. WHEN THERE'S A
GREAT PRINCIPAL THERE, I CAN
APPRECIATE HAVING A GOOD SCHOOL
SITE LEADER. BUT DO YOU DO YOU
DOES SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PAY
TEACHERS MORE TO TEACH IN THE
HIGHEST NEED SCHOOLS? NO, THERE
IS NOT A DISTRIBUTION LIKE DO
ANY OF THE SUPERINTENDENTS HAVE
ANY KIND OF A DISTRIBUTION LIKE
THAT? OKAY. WE WOULD YOU AGREE
WITH MR. LAFORTUNE'S OBSERVATION
THAT THAT THE HIGHEST NEED
SCHOOLS TEND TO HAVE THE LEAST
EXPERIENCED, MOST EMERGENCY
CREDENTIAL TEACHERS. AGAIN I
DON'T HAVE THE DATA SET. I WOULD
I WOULD AGREE THAT THAT PROBABLY
IS THE CASE. BUT I ALSO AGREE IS
A STRONG PRINCIPAL WILL KEEP
THEIR STAFF THERE AND MAINTAIN
THAT. SO IT IS A LOWER
DISTRIBUTION BECAUSE WE'VE GOT
MORE FOLKS AT THE SCHOOL SITES
HELPING AND SUPPORTING AND
CREATING SMALLER CLASS SIZES AND
GROUPS. BUT YES, WE'VE GOT OUR
NEWER TEACHERS ARE GOING TO OUR
HIGH POVERTY. WE MIGHT BE AN
OUTLIER WITH THIS DATA BECAUSE
THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR
TEACHERS, WE ARE FROM OUR
COMMUNITY, SO THEY GO ON TO
BECOME TEACHERS AND THEN THEY
STAY WITH US THROUGHOUT THEIR
CAREERS AND THEIR FAMILIES LIKE
MINE. I GREW UP IN SOUTH SAN
DIEGO, SO WE'RE THREE
GENERATIONS OF TEACHERS ALL IN
THIS AREA. SO WE MIGHT BE UNIQUE
IN THIS WAY. ALSO, OUR TEACHERS
TEND TO HAVE B CLAD CREDENTIALS,
SO THEY'RE HIGHLY QUALIFIED TO
TEACH THE DUAL LANGUAGE
IMMERSION PROGRAM AS WELL. SO
THERE'S YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES WHEN
THE HEART IS ATTACHED TO THE
COMMUNITY, THEN YOU STAY. DO YOU
PAY YOUR IS IT THE B CLAD. DO
YOU PAY TEACHERS WITH THERE WAS
A CERTAIN YEAR WHERE THEY HAD A
STIPEND UP TO ONE YEAR, LIKE A
IT WAS 2013, AND THEN THE
STIPEND KIND OF DISSIPATED
BECAUSE OF THE CALSTRS PENSION
AUDITS. WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING TO
LOOK AT THAT STIPEND AS TO
WHETHER IT CONTINUES OR NOT.
WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD AGREE A
GREAT PRINCIPAL KEEPS THEIR
TEACHERS AND A GREAT COMMUNITY
GROWS THEIR TEACHERS. OKAY. I
THINK THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE.
DOCTOR POTTER, YOU. OH, HERE WE
GO. YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU CITED
RECEIVING THE CCPA GOLDEN BELL
AWARD FOR THE RAPID
RECLASSIFICATION PROGRAM WITH
2,022% RECLASSIFICATION RATE,
OUTPACING THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA. I, I WAS WONDERING
IF, YOU KNOW, ON THE TOPIC OF
WHETHER GIVING SUPPLEMENTAL
GRANT DOLLARS FOR SPECIAL
EDUCATION STUDENTS, WHETHER THAT
WOULD INCENTIVIZE THE
OVERIDENTIFICATION OF STUDENTS.
I MEAN, IT, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMED
LIKE YOU'RE GOING THE OPPOSITE
DIRECTION WITH THE ELL STUDENTS
BY RECLASSIFYING THEM. YOUR YOU
KNOW, I MEAN, YOU'RE YOU'RE
GETTING LESS FUNDING. IS THAT
CORRECT? THIS IS A PROBLEMATIC
THING. IT'S A WONDERFUL THING TO
RECLASSIFY AT A HIGH RATE. BUT
BOTH WITH THE DASHBOARD AND I
THINK THE DASHBOARD IS
RECALIBRATING ITSELF FOR OUR
RECLASSIFIED ENGLISH LEARNERS IN
TERMS OF THE TOTAL ENGLISH
LEARNER CALCULATION OF GROWTH,
EL GROWTH. SO THE NGUYEN IS FOR
STUDENTS, RIGHT? THE MORE
STUDENTS THAT WE CAN RECLASSIFY
WITHIN THAT FIVE YEAR PERIOD,
THE BETTER. AND WE'RE VERY PROUD
OF OUR WORK WITH THE NATIONAL
CENTER FOR URBAN SCHOOL
TRANSFORMATION. AND CUST AND I
BELIEVE THE NEXT EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR NOW SITS ON THE STATE
BOARD OF EDUCATION. DOCTOR
FRANCISCO ESCOBEDO. SO WE'RE
EXCITED TO BE PARTNERING WITH
HIM. ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU DO
START TO HAVE A DIMINISHED RATE
OF FUNDING FOR THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE LEARNERS AS THE THEY
BECOME REPS AND PULL OUT. I
WOULD PROPOSE THAT THE FOCUS
THEN, INSTEAD OF REMOVING THAT
FUNDING, THAT THE FUNDING THAT
WE WERE WOULD HAVE LOST BE
SHIFTED TO THE LONG TERM ENGLISH
LEARNERS, BECAUSE THIS IS THE
POPULATION OF STUDENTS THAT
NEEDS THE MOST HELP WITH OUR
ENGLISH LEARNERS. BUT
RECLASSIFICATION IS EQUALLY
IMPORTANT BECAUSE OUR REPS BOTH
STATEWIDE AND IN MY DISTRICT,
ARE OUTPACING THE CAST SCORES
FOR OUR ENGLISH ONLY STUDENTS.
SO WE KNOW THAT RECLASSIFICATION
IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. WE ALSO
KNOW WE NEED TO DO MORE FOR OUR
LITTLES. AND I THINK MORE
RESEARCH AND DEDICATED, FOCUSED
SUPPORT FOR THESE STUDENTS IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. OKAY, BUT
BUT GIVEN GIVEN THAT YOU'RE, YOU
KNOW, OBVIOUSLY DOING THE RIGHT
THING AND DOING A GREAT JOB WITH,
WITH YOUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, YOU
KNOW, AS IT RELATES TO ENGLISH
LEARNERS, I MEAN, DO YOU HAVE
ANY, YOU KNOW, ANY CONCERNS
ABOUT CREATING A FINANCIAL
INCENTIVE BY OFFERING A
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FOR SPECIAL
EDUCATION STUDENTS? I THINK
RESOURCES SHOULD FOLLOW THE
NEEDS, AND WE HAVE STUDENTS IN
OUR WHO HAVE SPECIAL NEEDS. THEY
NEED MORE RESOURCES. SO, YOU
KNOW, AS LONG AS WE FOLLOW THE
NEEDS AND, YOU KNOW, YEAR BY
YEAR OVER YEAR, WE HAVE TO LOOK
TO SEE WHO ARE THE STUDENTS THAT
NEED US THE MOST, THAT NEED
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES AND THAT'S
WHERE OUR RESOURCES SHOULD
FOLLOW THEM. SURE. AND THAT'S A
VERY BASIC CONCEPT. SO NOT
PRIORITIZING ONE GROUP OVER THE
OTHER, BUT EACH YEAR THOSE
RESOURCES SHOULD FOLLOW THOSE
STUDENTS. DO ANY OF THE
SUPERINTENDENTS HAVE CONCERNS
ABOUT AND, YOU KNOW, CREATING A
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FOR SPECIAL
EDUCATION STUDENTS? I DON'T I
THINK THAT THE NEED IS THERE
ANYWAYS. I DON'T THINK THAT IT
WOULD BE INCENTIVIZING BECAUSE
THE COSTS ARE ALREADY COMING.
THEY'RE ALREADY THERE. THE
SERVICES ARE. AND IF THE IF EVEN
WITH THE SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT FOR
SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS, IF
THE EXPENSES ARE COMING FROM
IDENTIFICATION, YOU KNOW,
OUTWEIGHED ANY ADDITIONAL
SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT, I WOULD
IMAGINE THAT WOULD BE A
DISINCENTIVE FOR
OVERIDENTIFICATION. THAT MAKES
SENSE. YEAH. OKAY. LAST YOU
KNOW, WE HEARD DOCTOR JOHNSON IN
THE FIRST PANEL TALKING ABOUT,
YOU KNOW, HIS SUMMARY OF THE
MOST EFFECTIVE EXPENDITURES
USING SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT DOLLARS. HE
TALKED ABOUT CLASS SIZE, TEACHER
SALARIES, TEACHER TURNOVER,
GUIDANCE COUNSELORS AND HEALTH
SERVICES, AND TEACHER
PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT CAN CAN EACH ONE OF
THE SUPERINTENDENTS LIKE
SUMMARIZE. YOU KNOW WHAT WHAT
WHAT ARE YOUR YOUR BIGGEST
EXPENDITURES. HOW DO YOU YOU
KNOW HOW HOW DO YOU SPEND THE
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION
DOLLARS? WHAT ARE YOUR YOUR
BIGGEST EXPENDITURES? USING
SUPPLEMENTAL AND CONCENTRATION.
CONCENTRATION GRANT DOLLARS I
MEAN, EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE
ACTUAL DATA, I MEAN, IF YOU CAN
LIKE GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT YOU
KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IS IT GOING
PRIMARILY, YOU KNOW, TO REDUCE
CLASS SIZES DISTRICT WIDE? IS IT
IS IT IS IT BEING USED, YOU
KNOW, TO INCREASE, YOU KNOW,
SALARIES ACROSS THE DISTRICT OR
ARE YOU, YOU KNOW, ARE YOU
SPENDING MOST OF THOSE DOLLARS
ON LIKE, YOU KNOW, INNOVATION
AND INTERVENTION AND SUPPORT
SERVICES? FOR US IT'S A
COMBINATION OF EVERYTHING. WE
ARE SPENDING A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF DOLLARS ON CLASS SIZE
REDUCTION ACROSS OUR DISTRICT
AND REDUCING COMBINATION
CLASSES. BUT ALSO SALARIES AND
MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORTS AND
EVERYTHING YOU MENTIONED, BUT
WHICH IS BIGGER THE ACROSS THE
DISTRICT EXPENDITURES OR THE
SPECIFIC INTERVENTION AND
SUPPORT EXPENDITURES ACROSS THE
DISTRICT FOR CLASS SIZE. OKAY.
IT'S ALL FAIRLY SIMILAR AS WELL.
SO LOTS OF STUDENT INTERVENTION
SUPPORTS LOTS OF WELLNESS
INITIATIVES TO MAKE SURE THAT
OUR STUDENTS ARE OKAY, INCLUDING
AN INCREASE OF COUNSELOR
ALLOCATION. THERE'S ALSO BEEN A
LOT OF SUPPORT, LIKE WITH OUR
TK, WE IMPLEMENTED WHOLE
DISTRICT. SO WE'VE INVESTED VERY
HEAVILY. WE HAVE ABOUT 4800
STUDENTS ENROLLED THERE. AND
THEN ALSO A VERY LARGE SUPPORT
FOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION. WE
HAVE VERY HIGH HIGH SCHOOL
GRADUATION REQUIREMENTS WITH A
LOT OF SUPPORTS THAT GO IN THERE
AS WELL. BUT WOULD YOU SAY THAT
THE ACROSS THE DISTRICT
EXPENDITURES ARE LARGER THAN THE
INTERVENTION SUPPORT SAY THAT
OKAY. YEAH, I WOULD HAVE TO ECHO
THAT. PROBABLY CLASS SIZE IS THE
LARGEST SINGLE EXPENDITURE.
KEEPING THAT CLASS SIZE
RELATIVELY LOW, WE RECEIVE ABOUT
$13 MILLION IN SUPPLEMENTAL AND
CONCENTRATION GRANT FUNDS. ONCE
YOU'RE FINISHED WITH THE CLASS
SIZE, THEN WE HAVE ALL OF THE
OTHER PROGRAMS TAKE BETWEEN 1 TO
$2 MILLION, INCLUDING OUR SCI FI
PROGRAM. ALSO, OUR DUAL LANGUAGE
PROGRAM, THE SOCIAL EMOTIONAL
PROGRAM THAT'S CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT. AND EVEN THE SCHOOL
ATTENDANCE PROGRAM. SO ALL OF
THOSE TAKE ABOUT 1 TO 2 MILLION
EACH. OKAY. PRIMARILY ACROSS THE
DISTRICT PROGRAMS, STUDENT
INTERVENTIONS, THE MTSS THAT I
SPOKE ABOUT AT THE ELEMENTARY
DISTRICT, IN ADDITION TO OUR ELL
DEPARTMENT AND ALSO THE SUPPORTS
THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THAT, THE
ENGLISH, THE ELL DEPARTMENT, AND
THEN ADDITIONALLY FULL DAY
KINDER ORIGINALLY SEVEN YEARS
AGO, IT WAS HALF DAY. SO NOW
IT'S FULL DAY KINDER. AND THAT'S
QUITE A BIT OF EXPENSE TOO. ALL
RIGHT. OKAY. I DON'T SEE ANY
OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT ARE
ASKING TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED. SO
I'LL SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO
ALL THE PANELISTS FOR SHARING
YOUR YOUR WISDOM AND YOUR
EXPERIENCE. REALLY APPRECIATE
YOU COMING TO THE CAPITOL TO
TESTIFY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.
ONE MINUTE, TWO MINUTES. YEAH.
OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO OPEN UP FOR
PUBLIC COMMENTS. IF YOU CAN
LIMIT YOUR PUBLIC COMMENTS TO
ONE MINUTE EACH. WE WELCOME OUR
FIRST SPEAKER. THANKS, MR.
CHAIR. JOHN WINGER HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA CHARTER
SCHOOL ASSOCIATION, APPRECIATE
THE HEARING TODAY. FIRST OFF,
I'LL SAY LCFS HAS BEEN
TRANSFORMATIONAL IN THE
EDUCATION FUNDING SECTOR, BOTH
FOR EQUITABLE, TRANSPARENT AND
FLEXIBLE, MORE FLEXIBLE FOR ALL
SCHOOLS AND STUDENTS. WITH THAT
SAID, OBVIOUSLY THERE'S ALWAYS
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT. SO JUST
FOCUSING ON THE CONCENTRATION
GRANT, I THINK SINCE THOSE
GRANTS ARE BASED ON THE DISTRICT
AVERAGE, WHICH CREATES FUNDING
INEQUITY FOR MANY DISADVANTAGED
SCHOOLS, THAT ALSO APPLIES AT
THE CHARTER SCHOOL LEVEL AS
WELL. USUALLY WE'RE TREATED AS
AN LÀ, BUT FOR CONCENTRATION
GRANTS WE ARE BASED ON THE
DISTRICT AVERAGE. AND SO WE HAVE
A LOT OF PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS
THAT HAVE SERVED MANY HIGH NEEDS,
DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS, BUT ARE
IN CERTAIN DISTRICTS THAT DO NOT
QUALIFY FOR THE CONCENTRATION
GRANT. SO WE BELIEVE THAT
CREATES QUITE A BIT OF INEQUITY.
THERE, NOT JUST FOR PUBLIC
CHARTER SCHOOLS, BUT FOR ALL
SCHOOLS IN VARIOUS DISTRICTS
THAT DON'T MEET THAT THRESHOLD.
AND SO WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE
THE CONVERSATIONS WITH YOU WITH
THE COMMITTEE ON JUST MAYBE
LOOKING AT THAT AND TRYING TO
CREATE A LITTLE BIT MORE EQUITY
ON THE CONCENTRATION GRANT.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR.
CHAIR. MEMBERS. STAFF. TRISTAN
BROWN, FEDERATION OF TEACHERS.
THANK YOU. AND TO EVERYONE HERE
FOR THIS INCREDIBLE DEEP DIVE
INTO THE POLICY AREA. AND MAYBE
THIS IS A TIME RECORD FOR A
BUDGET SUB HEARING, BUT WE
PLANNED ON ITERATING A LOT OF
THE POINTS MADE EARLIER ABOUT
FOCUSING ON RETENTION AND
RECRUITMENT OF THE EDUCATION
STAFF, AND DRILLING DOWN ON
REDUCTION OF CLASS SIZE. WE
THINK THAT RETAINING VETERAN
EDUCATORS AND SMALL CLASS SIZES
IS THE NOT SO SECRET SAUCE TO
STUDENT SUCCESS. BUT GIVEN SOME
OF THE COMMENTS IN THE LAST
PANEL, I THINK I'D RATHER PIVOT
TO THE FACT THAT I DON'T KNOW IF
THIS IS TABOO, BUT PERHAPS A
DISCUSSION OF THIS LEVEL SHOULD
ALSO INCLUDE OUR MEMBERS FROM
THE REVENUE TAX COMMITTEE,
BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM THAT NO
MATTER HOW WE SHIFT THE FORMULA
AND DIRECT THE FUNDS, THE FUNDS
AREN'T THERE. THEY'RE NOT
ENOUGH. AND I THINK IN THE FIRST
PANEL, WE HEARD HOW MUCH WE ARE
BEHIND OTHER STATES. AND SO IN
THE STATE WITH THE FIFTH LARGEST
ECONOMY IN THE WORLD, WHERE WE
HAVE A, FOR INSTANCE, NOT TO
PICK ON ONE, BUT THE TECH SECTOR
WHERE SOME OF THE TOP
CORPORATIONS IN THAT SECTOR HAVE
HAD AT ONE POINT OR ANOTHER,
MORE CAPITALIZATION THAN THE
ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND
YET THEY STORE MONEY IN PLACES
LIKE IRELAND WHERE THEY
SHELTERED IT FROM OUR REVENUE
SYSTEM. SO IF CHILDREN ARE GOING
TO SCHOOL WITH SHOES THAT ARE
TWO SIZES TOO SMALL AND GOING TO
SCHOOL HUNGRY, BUT WE'LL WE'LL
LINE UP FOR THE NEWEST TECH AND
LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT. I
THINK THAT THAT ALSO SHOULD BE A
PART OF ANY LONG TERM DISCUSSION
ON HOW WE'RE GOING TO TURN
AROUND THE EDUCATION SYSTEM AND
MAKE AN LCFF 2.0 THAT REALLY CAN
TARGET IN ON THOSE INEQUITIES,
NOT JUST FROM STUDENT TO STUDENT
AND PEER GROUPS, BUT HOW WE DO
THE FUNDING ITSELF. SO THANK YOU
FOR FACILITATING ALL THIS. WE
HOPE THAT REVENUE IS A HUGE PART
OF WHAT WE CAN WORK ON IN THIS
NEXT SESSION. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR. JOHN
AFFELDT FROM PUBLIC ADVOCATES
AND THE LCFF EQUITY COALITION. I
WANT TO SECOND THOSE COMMENTS
FROM THE CALIFORNIA FEDERATION
OF TEACHERS. WE DO THINK THAT
ADEQUACY HAS ALWAYS BEEN A
NECESSARY BUT MISSING INGREDIENT
IN OUR STATE'S SCHOOL FUNDING
FORMULA. AND SO WE WOULD SUPPORT
AN INCREASE OF THE BASE GRANT,
BUT ALSO WE THINK WE DO NEED TO
REVISIT THAT 20%. THAT'S MUCH
LOWER OF A SUPPLEMENTAL GRANT
THAN OTHER STATES USE. AND IN
FACT, THE RESEARCH INDICATES
MUCH MORE IS NEEDED. WE SUPPORT
DEDUPLICATING THE UNDUPLICATED
SO THAT INDIVIDUAL NEEDS GET MET
AND THE BOTH OF THOSE THINGS WE
THINK CAN BE ADDRESSED THROUGH
THE DECLINING ENROLLMENT
DIVIDEND. SO I THINK THAT'S AN
EXCELLENT SUGGESTION. THE ONE
THING THAT PROFESSOR JOHNSON
MENTIONED THAT I THINK WARRANTS
BEING LIFTED UP AS WELL, IS
DIGITIZING THE LCAP OR CREATING
A WEB BASED LCAP. THE LCAP IS
WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD
ON HOW THESE FUNDS ARE BEING
SPENT, AND IT'S NOT THAT USEFUL
OR TRANSPARENT WHEN THERE ARE
HUNDREDS OF PAGES. AND I THINK
FOR A SMALL INVESTMENT, $10
MILLION OR SO TO DEVELOP A WEB
BASED LCAP, WE COULD HAVE A MUCH
SIMPLER FORMAT WHERE PEOPLE
COULD SEE THEIR LCAP ON THEIR
PHONE, AND YOU COULD DO THE KIND
OF SEARCHES THAT CLICK THROUGH
AND GET DOWN TO THE SCHOOL LEVEL
AND GIVE US A MUCH BETTER IDEA
FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO
LOOK INTO IT, AND THAT THAT IS
MORE OF A MECHANISM THAT WE
COULD USE TO BRING THE SPENDING
CLOSER TO THE COMMUNITY AND MORE
TRANSPARENT FOR THE PUBLIC.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR. SARAH
PETROWSKI, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL
BUSINESS OFFICIALS, REPRESENTING
OVER 30,000 SCHOOL BUSINESS
LEADERS STATEWIDE, WE APPRECIATE
THE DISCUSSION TODAY, ESPECIALLY
SOME OF THE POINTS RAISED AROUND
THE TRANSFORMATIVE IMPACT OF
LCFF AND THE NEED TO INCREASE
THE BASE GRANT. OUR MEMBERS ARE
READY TO SUPPORT AS THIS
DISCUSSION CONTINUES. THANK YOU
SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. SEEING NO FURTHER
PUBLIC COMMENTS, I'D LIKE TO
THANK EVERYONE FOR COMING FROM
NEAR AND AFAR AND THIS MEETING
IS ADJOURNED.