Russell Frank, Ph.D. Director II Assessment and Accountability Services Mike Barney Director II...

Russell Frank, Ph.D.

Director II

Assessment and Accountability

Services

Mike Barney

Director II

Instructional Services

LCFF and LCAP Reshapes School

Funding and Accountability

Part I: LCFF

Russ FrankRCOE

Resources

• School Services of California• Legislative Analyst’s Report• WestEd

• Special Thanks to:

• Nancy Sheets: Director II, RCOE• Paul Jessup: Deputy Superintendent, RCOE• Bill Spires: Director II, RCOE• Art Davis: RSDSS Director, Madera County

Office of Education• Janelle Kubinec: Director, National and

State Special Projects, WestED

Outcomes

1. Understand how the components of LCFF return districts to 07-08 funding over time

2. Discuss the implications for districts

3. Pose questions for follow up.

Local Control Funding Formula Components

1. Target Base Rates Per 4 Grade Spans2. Adjusted Base Rates for CSR and CTE3. Supplemental Funding for any EL or LI4. Concentration Funding for ELs and LIs

above 55% of total enrollment5. TIIG Add-On6. HTS Transportation Add-On7. Economic Recovery Target Add-On8. “Commitment” to close the gap and

COLA

Formula Components of the LCFF: 1

Target Base Rates• Per ADA in CALPADS

• K-3: $6,845• 4-6 $6,947• 7-8 $7,154• 9-12$8,289

• It’s like the revenue limits of old.

Basic Rate for All Kids

Per ADA in CALPADS

K-3: $6,8454-6 $6,9477-8 $7,1549-12 $8,289

* Basic Rate for All Kids* Like a the Old Revenue Limit



Adjusted Base Rates (ABR)

• Let’s keep class sizes low in K-3 -- 24-1 or negotiated level:

• Add 10.4 percent of the base rate.

• It costs more to educate 9-12 -- Targets CTE

• Add 2.6 percent of the base rate.

CSR K-3 and CTE 9-12

Provisions for K-3 CSR Adjustment• K-3 CSR at 24-1

by 20-21 • Unless CSR is

collectively bargained otherwise

• If negotiated at a different rate, LEA not subject to provision.

• If class size larger than 24 LEA must make progress toward reducing the gap by 10 % annually during transition.


Supplemental Funding• The following

subgroups offer more challenges to educators:

• Low Income (LI) or what we used to call SED.

• Foster Youth as LI• English Learners

• Add 20% of the ABR per eligible student

SED or Low Income (LI) & English Learners ELs

Calculating Supplemental Funding

• Foster Youth are LI• EL/LI calculated on 3

year rolling average from CALPADS taken from CBEDS.

• 2013 CBEDS for 13-14 LCFF

• Unduplicated count. An EL who is low income = 1 student.

Dilemma of Reclassification• Student Reclassified as FEP

who is NOT also LI no longer generates extra $$$. LCAP Connection.

Supplemental Follow up

• Challenge: districts need to find out what their unduplicated 13-14 counts are.

Think About It

• What are the implications for your district?

• What questions arise for you?

• Share these thoughts with your partners


Concentration Funding

• High concentrations of ELs and LI present an even greater challenge for LEAs.

• Each unduplicated LI or EL above 55% of enrollment generates 50% of the ABR

For Districts with many ELs & LI

Will You Get Concentration Funding?

LEA Ensures “Proportionality”

“Increase or improve services for ELs/LIs in proportion to the increase in funds apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of unduplicated pupils”

?

LCFF and LCAP Templates

• WestEd and CDE role

• Fiscal Guidance by January 30, 2014

• Preview of Fiscal and LCAP by November 6-7 2013?

• RCOE Preview Nov. 21, 2013

• LCAP Template by March 30, 2013

Think About It




Formula Components of the LCFF: 5Targeted Instr. Improve. Grant

• If received in 12-13 will receive again through 20-21.

• Can be used for any educational purpose.

• See list of RC districts

First of Three Add-Ons


Home/School Transportation (HTST)

• If LEA received HTST in 12-13 it will receive again through 2020-21.

• Restricted to transporting eligible students.

• See list of RC districts.

Second of Three Add-Ons


Economic Recovery Target (ERT)

• In the transition from 2007-08 formula to LCFF, some LEAs (230) lose funding due to their former concentrations of categorical funds.

• ERT is like a hold harmless for these LEAs.

• = increase each year for 8 years

• Likely no ERTs in RC

Third of Three Add-Ons

2013-14 Categorical Survivors


Gap Funding1. Fully funding LCFF in

one year would cost $18 billion.

2. Target: Let’s get back to 2007-08 Levels

3. Gap funding “Commit-ment”: Aimed at closing each LEA’s difference between the 20-21 target funding and 13-14 funding by 12% annually.

8 Years to Close Funding Gap

TARGET

TARGET

TARGET

LCFF Funding

LCFF Funding

Getting to the TargetsLeverage for Closing the Gap

• “Commitment” to funding gap closing

• COLA increases to the Base Rate

• P1 in December: LEAs paint the first fuzzy picture of the increases.

• P2 in April: LEAs should generate a clearer idea of increase.

LCFF/LCAP Summary• Reforms

state’s much criticized funding mechanism.

• Far greater LEA flexibility on meeting student need.

• More meaningful stakeholder input during development.

Major Shifts Made by the Local Control Funding Formula

Before LCFF• Revenue Limits

• State categoricals w/temporary tiered flex

• K-3 CSR: Limited funding with unlimited class sizes

• Accountability and performance separate from funding

After LCFF• LCFF base funding dif-

ferentiated by grade span.

• Unduplicated pupil weights, concentration funding

• K-3 CSR targeting 24-1

• Local Control Accountability Plans required. (July 1, 2014)

What Stays the Same?

• Financial Audits• Compliance with Williams• School Accountability Report

Cards• Federal funding, planning and

accountability• LEA as subgrantee of the state

Downside?• Economic

downturn.• Low income

districts vulnerable.

• Prop 30 phase outs: 2016, 18

• In 20-21 gets us to where we were in 07-08.

Think About It




Russell Frank, Ph.D. Director II Assessment and Accountability Services Mike Barney Director II...

Documents

Transcript of Russell Frank, Ph.D. Director II Assessment and Accountability Services Mike Barney Director II...