Featured Items
Thumbnail - California's Education System: A 2019 Guide

California's Education System:
A 2019 Guide

Staff
Jackie Barocio
(916) 319-8333
Child Care, Expanded Learning, School Facilities, and Teachers
Sara Cortez
(916) 319-8348
Special Education, Preschool, and Child Nutrition
Kenneth Kapphahn
(916) 319-8339
Proposition 98, School District Budgets, School Transportation
Lisa Qing
(916) 319-8306
California State University, Student Financial Aid
Paul Steenhausen
(916) 319-8303
California Community Colleges
Ian Klein
(916) 319-8336
University of California; College of the Law, San Francisco; California State Library
Michael Alferes
(916) 319-8338
Local Control Funding Formula, Charter Schools, Alternative Schools, High School Career Technical Education
Edgar Cabral
(916) 319-8343
Deputy Legislative Analyst: K-12 Education
Jennifer Pacella
(916) 319-8332
Deputy Legislative Analyst: Higher Education

Publications

Education

To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.

Other

Webcast: The 2010-11 Budget: Proposition 98 and K-12 Education

February 25, 2010 - Section director Jennifer Kuhn discusses the LAO report "The 2010-11 Budget: Proposition 98 and K-12 Education."

Report

The 2010-11 Budget: Higher Education

February 25, 2010 - Though the Governor portrays his 2010-11 budget proposal as protecting education, his plan would affect areas of education quite differently—significantly reducing funding for child care and K-12 education while augmenting funding for most higher education programs. We recommend the Legislature build a more balanced education budget. For higher education, we recommend providing new funding for community colleges through a $14 per unit fee increase; reducing the proposed augmentations for the state’s universities while still restoring their per-student funding rates to 2007-08 levels; and rejecting the Governor's proposed cuts to financial aid programs. Our recommendations on other parts of the education budget are contained in a companion publication: The 2010-11 Budget: Proposition 98 and K-12 Education.

(Short video introducing this report)

Report

The 2010-11 Budget: Proposition 98 and K-12 Education

February 25, 2010 - Though the Governor portrays his 2010-11 budget proposal as protecting education, his plan would affect areas of education quite differently—significantly reducing funding for child care and K-12 education while augmenting funding for most higher education programs. We recommend the Legislature build a more balanced education budget. Detailed in this report, our Proposition 98 alternative budget plan cuts child care about $100 million less than the Governor; makes approximately $800 million in targeted cuts to K-12 education, with additional K-12 cuts, as needed, coming from general purpose and/or categorical funding; and provides new funding for community colleges through a $14 per unit fee increase. In a companion publication, The 2010-11 Budget: Higher Education, we provide additional detail on our community college recommendations, as well as cover various other postsecondary education areas, including the state's universities and financial aid programs.

(Video introducing this report)

Handout

Promise of California's Master Plan: Access Through Affordability

February 17, 2010 - Presented to the Joint Committee on the Master Plan for Education. Hon. Ira Ruskin, Chair, and Hon. Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair.

Handout

Proposed Cal Grant Reductions

February 17, 2010 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance

Handout

Overview of Special Session Proposals: Proposition 98 Budget

February 9, 2010 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 On Education Finance

Report

Education Mandates: Overhauling a Broken System

February 2, 2010 - Currently, the state requires K-12 and community college districts to perform hundreds of mandated activities, the majority of which provide little benefit to students or teachers. Since the state does not pay for K-14 mandates on a regular basis, the result is billions in outstanding costs the state must eventually pay. In this report, we recommend comprehensively reforming K–14 mandates. If a mandate serves a purpose fundamental to the education system, such as protecting student health or providing essential assessment and oversight data, it should be funded. If not, the mandate should be eliminated. Taken as a whole, our reform package would relieve school districts and community colleges of performing hundreds of activities that provide little value to students while providing them with adequate and timely compensation for the activities still required of them. In addition, comprehensively reforming mandates would reduce the state’s annual obligations by more than $350 million—funds that could be saved or allocated to districts for higher priorities.

Report

The Master Plan at 50: Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts--Coordinating Higher Education in California

January 28, 2010 - California’s approach to coordination of the state's higher education system over the past 50 years has been indirect, resting mostly on well–defined missions and eligibility pools to guide the development of higher education institutions. This approach worked well during several decades of expansion, producing arguably the greatest higher education system in the world. The effectiveness of this approach has declined over the last quarter century, however, and institutions have been left to pursue their separate interests with insufficient mechanisms to advance the state’s priorities. This report examines the need for a systemwide approach to planning and coordination of California’s system of higher education, and proposes strategies for improvement.

Other

Webcast: Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts--Coordinating Higher Education in California

January 27, 2010 - In this 5-minute video, analyst Judy Heiman discusses the LAO Report "Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts--Coordinating Higher Education in California."

Report

Prisons vs. Universities Proposal Would Unwisely Lock Up Budget Flexibility

January 26, 2010 - In his January budget, the Governor proposed a state constitutional amendment that would require reductions in spending on state corrections, with corresponding increases in spending for public universities. Beginning in 2014–15, the state would be required to dedicate no more than 7 percent of state General Fund spending to corrections and no less than 10 percent to public universities. We urge the Legislature to reject this proposal because it (1) would unwisely constrain the state’s ability to allocate funding where it is most needed each year; and (2) is unnecessary, as the state already has the ability to shift funding among programs without this constitutional amendment. Special session.

Handout

Overview of Proposition 98 Budget

January 25, 2010 - Presented to Legislative Staff

Handout

Overview of Education Budget

January 19, 2010 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee

Other

What Role Does the State Play in Public Higher Education?

December 15, 2009 - What Role Does the State Play in Public Higher Education? This is one of a series of issue briefs examining important questions about higher education funding in California. For more information on this topic, or to request other briefs from this series, contact the Legislative Analyst’s Office Higher Education section at (916) 319-8349, or visit our Web site at www.lao.ca.gov.

Handout

California’s Budget Situation

December 4, 2009 - California’s Budget Situation, presented by Mac Taylor to the California School Boards Association on December 4, 2009.

Other

Does the State Spend More on Corrections or Higher Education?

December 3, 2009 - Does the State Spend More on Corrections or Higher Education? This is one of a series of issue briefs examining important questions about higher education funding in California. For more information on this topic, or to request other briefs from this series, contact the Legislative Analyst’s Office Higher Education section at (916) 319-8339, or visit our Web site at www.lao.ca.gov.