1 / 10

Analysis of Governor's Local Control Funding Proposal: Strengths and Concerns

This report from the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) examines the strengths and concerns of the Governor's Local Control Funding Proposal. Key strengths include its simplicity, transparency, and equitable funding for similar students, particularly focusing on English Learners and low-income students. However, it also raises concerns, such as the exclusion of significant categorical programs and the spread of concentration funding. Recommendations for improvement include adopting certain categorical programs and ensuring funds directly support supplemental services for disadvantaged students.

romeo
Télécharger la présentation

Analysis of Governor's Local Control Funding Proposal: Strengths and Concerns

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Local Control Funding Formula Legislative Analyst’s Office www.lao.ca.gov

  2. Strengths of Governor’s Proposal • Is Simple and Transparent • Links Funding to Costs • Sets Reasonable Base Rates • Sets Reasonable Supplemental Rates for English Learners/Low-Income (EL/LI) Students

  3. Strengths (Continued) • Funds Similar Students Similarly • Progresses Toward Uniform Rates • Provides Flexibility in Addressing Local Priorities • Places Emphasis on Students, Not on Complying With Spending Rules

  4. Concerns With Governor’s Proposal • Excludes Two of the Largest, Most Outdated Categorical Programs • Has Unnecessary K-3 and High School Supplements • Has No “Supplement, Not Supplant” Provision • Spreads Concentration Funding Too Thinly

  5. Concerns (Continued) • Maintains Historical Advantages for Basic Aid Districts • Does Not Protect Investments in Facilities

  6. LAO Recommendations • Include TIIG and HTS Transportation in New Formula • Reject K-3 and High School Supplements • Require EL/LI Funds Be Used for Supplemental Services • Provide Concentration Funds to Districts With Highest EL/LI Concentrations

  7. LAO Recommendations (Continued) • Minimize Historical Advantages for Basic Aid Districts • Retain Basic Requirements to Maintain Facilities

  8. Options for Change • Governor’s Formula • Revised Formula • A Few Block Grants

  9. Inaction Is Poor Option • Existing System Is Widely Recognized as Overly Complex, Irrational, Inefficient, and Highly Centralized • Resurrecting 40 Categorical Programs Now Flexed Likely Untenable

  10. Other Considerations • Timing Could Be As Good As It Gets • Not Fixing Everything Isn’t Good Reason Not to Fix Anything • Realistically, Refinements Will Be Needed As New System Rolled Out

More Related