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.
Overview of the Local Control Funding Formula and Local Control and Accountability Plans
- Format:
March 10, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
Rethinking How the State Funds School Facilities
- Format:
March 10, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
Overview of Proposition 98 Budget Proposals
- Format:
March 5, 2015 - Presented to Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education Finance
The 2015-16 Budget: Higher Education Analysis
February 27, 2015 - In this report, we provide an overview of the Governor’s higher education budget. We then review the segments' performance in certain key areas and assess the degree to which the segments require enrollment growth funding, base funding increases, and facilities funding. We find the segments have improved performance in some areas but additional improvement is needed. We find little to warrant additional enrollment growth at UC and CSU, and available data indicate CCC likely will not use all the growth funding provided in 2014-15. We recommend against unallocated budget increases, instead recommending that the Legislature link base increases to a cost-of-living adjustment and any additional increases to specified state priorities. We review several facility proposals and make various related recommendations, including recommending the Legislature establish state facility priorities and require the segments to submit a report describing how they plan to eliminate their maintenance backlogs.
Workforce Education And Training
- Format:
February 26, 2015 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee
California K-12 Funding in Context
- Format:
February 24, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
Overview of Proposition 98 Budget Proposals
- Format:
February 24, 2015 - Presented to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
Overview of UC Expenditures
- Format:
February 18, 2015 - Presented to: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Education Finance
The 2015-16 Budget: Proposition 98 Education Analysis
February 18, 2015 - The Governor's budget includes $7.8 billion in Proposition 98 funding increases for schools and community colleges, including $5 billion for programmatic increases and $2.8 billion for retiring outstanding obligations. In this report, we recommend the Legislature improve some of the Governor's specific Proposition 98 proposals and reject others. Most notably, though we recommend the Legislature adopt the Governor's proposal to provide $500 million for adult education consortia, we recommend making various programmatic improvements, folding some of the Governor's other proposed workforce funding into the adult education program, and rejecting a couple of the Governor's career technical education proposals. We also recommend rethinking the Governor's Internet infrastructure proposal. Additionally, we have various recommendations relating to the Local Control Funding Formula, county offices of education, and education mandates.
Funding for Major Internet-Related Programs Since 2000
- Format:
- HTML
February 17, 2015 - Summarizes major state and federal funding for Internet-related programs.
The 2015-16 Budget: Rethinking How the State Funds School Facilities
February 17, 2015 - This report analyzes the state's system for financing school facilities and raises concerns with the existing system. We recommend the Legislature replace the state's current system for financing school facilities with a new system. Specifically, we recommend the Legislature: (1) establish an annualized "expected facility cost" based on the replacement cost of existing school buildings; (2) provide an annual per-student grant that reflects a specified minimum state share of cost; (3) adjust the grant for differences in local resources; (4) adjust the grant during the transition period for prior state investments in school facilities; (5) provide one-time funding to address the existing backlog of school facility projects; and (6) require grant recipients to adopt five-year facility accountability plans.
Implementation Update: Reforming Transfer From CCC to CSU
February 2, 2015 - This report updates our 2012 progress report on transfer reform. We found that since 2012, both CCC and CSU have made substantial progress in meeting the legislation’s goals. Although some community colleges and CSU campuses are lagging in meeting specific statutory targets, both segments are making a good faith effort to comply with the legislation. Moving forward, we recommend the Legislature set specific reporting and data requirements to ensure the segments stay on track toward achieving the goals of transfer reform.
Implementation of LCFF and LCAPs
- Format:
January 21, 2015 - Presented to: Senate Education Committee
Analysis of School District Reserves
January 21, 2015 - Last year the state adopted legislation to (1) cap school district reserves following deposits in the state school reserve recently established by Proposition 2 and (2) require districts to disclose additional information about their reserves each year. This report analyzes how district reserve levels have changed over time and describes some of the key factors that cause reserve levels to vary from district to district. After assessing recent changes, this report recommends the Legislature repeal the reserve caps and modify the disclosure provision.
Review of School Districts' 2014-15 Local Control and Accountability Plans
January 20, 2015 - This report examines Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) for 50 school districts to evaluate whether they reflect thoughtful strategic planning and meet statutory requirements. We find that fulfilling all of the statutory LCAP requirements is a challenging undertaking for districts. Requiring districts to cover every area required in statute—regardless of local conditions—reduces the time and energy districts can spend on areas in need of greatest attention. We recommend the Legislature allow districts to focus their plans on their highest priority areas rather than require them to address all eight state-specified priority areas. We also find that the information in districts’ LCAPs related to the services they will provide to EL/LI students is often unclear and difficult to understand. We recommend several changes that would improve the quality of this information. We also recommend the Legislature clarify the metrics districts can include in their plans. Additionally, we recommend the state disseminate model LCAPs to help districts improve their plans moving forward.