[Budget] compromising past promises/Compromising the future: NEW BUDGET RULES LOOSEN UP SCHOOL FUNDING + LAUSD BOARD INFORMATIVE ON CATEGORICAL FLEX

By Laurel Rosenhall and Robert Faturechi | The Sacramento Bee

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2009

Summer school. Art and music. Classes for gifted children.

Buying textbooks. Training math and English teachers. Tutoring students for the high school exit exam.

For decades, a large portion of California's school funding has been strictly designated for such categories.

Not any more.

In the budget deal crafted last week, the Legislature and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger combined many of the pots of money known as "categoricals." The result is that for the next five years, principals and district administrators will have more spending flexibility than they've had in recent history.

It's a move education reformers have been pushing for years, saying a bit more freedom with the checkbook would help schools meet their students' needs.

The new state budget cuts about $2.4 billion from schools this year and changes the payment terms of another $5 billion. The reductions get even deeper next year, when schools will face an additional cut of $400 million.

About $1 billion of the cuts will be taken out of categorical funding – which makes up one-third of the money California spends on education and funds more than 60 individual education programs.

Categorical funding became popular in the 1960s as politicians tried to help disadvantaged children by spending money specifically on them and ensuring the additional cash didn't wind up in teachers' paychecks, according to a new report by UC Berkeley's law school.

As categoricals proliferated over time, however, they created a bureaucratic web of obligations for educators, who couldn't target funds where they were needed most. Money for buying new technology couldn't be used to buy books for a library. Money for checking kids' teeth couldn't be spent on counseling. Money for training principals couldn't be used to train a teacher.

"Principals said they spent a God-awful amount of their time filling out compliance forms," said Bruce Fuller, a UC Berkeley education professor who surveyed principals for a recent study.

"They've got to keep receipts, keep billing information. … Principals become mini-bureaucrats rather than working with teachers and being in classrooms."

The findings led him to recommend – in the massive "Getting Down to Facts" report Schwarzenegger released with fanfare in March 2007 – that the state consolidate categorical funding.

And that is just what the new plan does. It collapses 42 categorical programs into one block of money, and trims it by about 15 percent, or $1 billion. Schools can now use that money for any purpose.

"They could do less on school safety and more on career tech," said Jennifer Kuhn, director of K-12 education with the Legislative Analyst's Office. "They can do less counseling and have smaller class sizes. They can do less adult ed and more K-12 ed."

Or, she said, they can skip spending on those programs and give teachers a raise.

---

COMPROMISING PAST PROMISES/COMPROMISING THE FUTURE: Under the "Budget Compromise" reached in Sacramento, Schools can now use money from these categorical programs for any purpose: [smf: "for any purpose" is somewhat misleading - see Informative (following)]
• Summer school/supplemental instruction

• Regional Occupational Centers and Programs

• High school counseling

• Specialized secondary programs

• Immediate intervention/underperforming and high achieving/improving schools programs

• Gifted and talented education (GATE)

• Mathematics and reading professional development

• Principal training program

• American Indian Early Childhood Education Program

• California Indian education centers

• Adult education

• Education technology

• Deferred maintenance

• Instructional materials

• Community day schools program

• Bilingual teacher training program

• National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Certification Incentive Program

• California School Age Families Education Program

• California High School Exit Exam

• Center for Civic Education

• Teacher dismissal apportionments

• Charter schools

• School safety

• Class size reduction, grade nine

• International baccalaureate diploma program

• California Association of Student Councils

• Pupil Retention Block Grant

• Teacher Credentialing Block Grant

• Professional Development Block Grant

• Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grants

• Library Improvement Block Grant

• School Safety Consolidated Competitive Grant

• Physical Education Block Grant

• Arts and Music Block Grant

• County Office of Education Williams Audits

• Certificated Staff Mentoring Program

• Oral Health Assessments

• Commission on Teacher Credentialing

Schools must continue to pay for these programs with categorical funding:

• Child Development

• Child Nutrition

• Economic Impact Aid

• Special Education

• Home-to-School Transportation

• After School Education & Safety

• Class Size Reduction, kindergarten – third grade

• Quality Education Investment Act

---

The plan has the potential to revolutionize school funding in California, said Michael Kirst, a Stanford education professor and former state Board of Education president.

But it doesn't do away with categorical funding altogether. About 20 categorical programs remain intact, including some of the biggest – special education and K-3 class-size reduction.

Because the restrictions on many of the biggest categorical programs have not been eased, the new flexibility won't help cash-strapped districts very much, said David Gordon, Sacramento County's superintendent of schools.

The changes might have been more useful during a time of surplus, he said. But without money, flexibility is of little use.

"To me it's more like, 'Do you cut your arm off or your hand off?' " Gordon said. "We have a bare-bones program already going in. That basic core – the reading, the math and so on – is something you can't trade off."

Other educators said the eased restrictions will give them some welcome wiggle room.

Patrick Godwin, superintendent of Folsom Cordova Unified, expects the relaxed rules will allow his district to avoid painful staff cuts.

"The district here already had a strong music and arts program," Godwin said. "So we'll be able to use those monies to keep more counselors or keep more electives in the high schools."

---

The following is from an LAUSD Office Of Government Relations informative to the Bd of Ed & Superintendent dated February 19, 2009

SUBJECT: STATE BUDGET APPROVED WITH MAJOR REDUCTIONS TO EDUCATION CATEGORICAL PROGRAMS

Determining the Categorical Program Reductions

Categorical programs are being funded on the basis of three tiers, with the funding for Tier 1 being the most protected. In 2008-09, the Tier 2 and 3 categorical programs are cut by 15 percent or $944 million. In 2009-10, Tiers 2 and 3 are cut by an additional 4.9 percent or $268 million. Page | 2

1. Tier 1 – No reductions and no flexibility options on the use of these dedicated funds (there are flexibility options within the Class Size Reduction program itself, which are described later). The following are the protected programs in this tier:

Budget Item	Title
Tier 1
6110-161-0001	Special Education
6110-196-0001	Child Development
6110-234-0001	K-3 Class Size Reduction
6110-128-0001	Economic Impact Aid (EIA)
6110-649-0001	After School Programs
6110-601-3116	Home-to-School Transportation
6110-203-0001	Child Nutrition
Quality Education Improvement Act (QEIA)
6110-130-0001	Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID)

2. Tier 2 – 15 percent reduction in 2008-09, and an additional 4.9% reduction in 2009-10. There are no flexibility options with these programs.

Budget Item	Title
Tier 2
6110-113-0001	Student Assessment Testing
6110-224-0001	Year Round Schools
6110-125-0001	English Learner Student Assistance
6110-220-0001	Charter School Facility Grant Program
6110-166-0001	Partnership Academies
6110-103-0001	Apprentice Program
6110-119-0001	Foster Youth Programs
6110-158-0001	Adults in Correctional Facilities
6110-182-0001	K-12 Internet Access
6110-167-0001	Agricultural Vocational Education

3. Tier 3 – 15 percent reduction in 2008-09 and an additional 4.9 percent reduction in 2009-10. For these programs, there is complete flexibility for a district to use these funds as it wishes.

Budget Item	Title
Tier 3
6110-246-0001	Targeted Instructional Improvement Block Grant (TIIG)
6110-156-0001	Adult Education
6110-105-0001	Regional Occupational Centers and Programs
6110-247-0001	School and Library Improvement Block Grant
6110-104-0001	Supplemental Instruction
6110-189-0001	Instructional Materials
6110-188-0001	Deferred Maintenance
6110-245-0001	Professional Development Block Grant Program
6110-108-0001	Supplemental School Counseling Program
6110-211-0001	Charter School Categorical Block Grant
6110-244-0001	Teacher Credentialing Block Grant
6110-123-0001	High Priority Schools Grant Program
6110-265-0001	Arts and Music Block Grant
6110-232-0001	Class Size Reduction - 9th Grade
6110-228-0001	School Safety Block Grant (8-12)
6110-243-0001	Pupil Retention Block Grant Program
6110-204-0001	CA High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE)-Support and Services
6110-198-0001	CA School Age Families Education
6110-137-0001	Math and Reading Professional Development
6110-124-0001	Gifted and Talented
6110-190-0001	Community Day Schools
6110-227-0001	Community -Based English Tutoring Program
6110-260-0001	PE Teacher Incentive Program
6110-193-0001	Peer Assistance and Review
6110-248-0001	School Safety Competitive Grants
6110-107-0001	County Offices of Education - Fiscal Oversight
6110-267-0001	Certificated Staff Mentoring
6110-266-0001	County Office of Education - Williams Audits
6110-122-0001	Specialized Secondary Program Grants
6100-144-0001	Principal Training Program
6110-151-0001	American Indian Education Centers
6110-268-0001	Child Oral Health Assessments
6110-195-0001	National Board Certification Incentives
6110-240-0001	Advanced Placement Programs
6110-193-0001	Bilingual Teacher Training
6110-150-0001	American Indian Early Childhood Education Centers
6110-193-0001	Reader Services for the Blind
6110-208-0001	Civic Education
6110-209-0001	Teacher Dismissal Apportionment
6110-242-0001	CA Association of Student Councils
6110-123-0001	Sanctions
6110-144-0001	Chief Business Officers Training Program
6360-101-0001	Local Assistance - Commission on Teacher Credentialing

Additional Flexibility Options

1. School districts now have the option of increasing the K-3 Class-Size Reduction (CSR) Program from the present 20:1 restriction without completely losing this specific categorical program funding. Districts would be subject to the following penalties with these new flexibility options:

Class Size Penalty

20.5 to 21.5 (less than) 5 percent

21.5 to 22.5 (less than) 10 percent

22.5 to 23.0 (less than) 15 percent

23.0 to 25.0 (less than) 20 percent

25 or over 30 percent

2. Deferred Maintenance: The .5 percent statutory match for deferred maintenance would be eliminated for the period of 2008-09 to 2012-13.

3. Routine Maintenance Reserve: The requirement for a 3 percent reserve for routine maintenance would be reduced to 1 percent for the period of 2008-09 to 2012-13.

4. Transfer of Categorical Program Balances: The District would have the authority to transfer the 2008-09 categorical balances for any educational purposes, except for balances in the following programs:

Special Education

QEIA

EIA

TIIG

Instructional Materials

CAHSEE

Supplemental Instruction

Transportation

Program Elimination

The High Priority Program is eliminated in 2009-10.

STATE SCHOOLS CHIEF DELIVERS DIRE MESSAGE TO LOCAL OFFICIALS + STATE SCHOOLS SUPERINTENDENT RALLIES SCHOOL LEADERS TO OPPOSE CUTS

State schools chief delivers dire message to local officials

By Caroline An, Staff Writer | Pasadena Star-News

State Supt. Jack O'Connell, center, with Pasadena Superintendent Edwin Diaz, far left, and LA County Superintendent Darline Robles, far right, discuss 2009's California State's budget, during the LA County Superintendents' Town Hall meeting, at McKinley School in Pasadena, Wednesday. (Correspondent photo by James Carbone)

 

5 Feb 2009 - PASADENA - Saying the public school system is in a "precarious state," California's chief or public education Wednesday urged area school leaders to consider asking property owners for help.

Speaking at a town hall meeting, dubbed "Save Our Schools," in Pasadena, state Superintendent of Public Education Jack O'Connell said parcel taxes, which must be approved by voters, might be the solution to cover local school budget shortfalls.

"More school districts are now looking at parcel taxes. Voters should be given the option of approving parcel taxes to pass to fund schools," O'Connell told about 20 20 local superintendents and school board members who met at McKinley School.

He said he supports legislation to lower the threshold for passing parcel taxes from the current two-thirds majority to 55 percent of voters.

In November, voters in various school districts across the state passed 17 parcel taxes, a sign that residents are committed to preserving their local public school systems, O'Connell said.

San Marino Unified School District is the most-recent district in the San Gabriel Valley seeking a parcel tax. The district plans to put the tax on the May ballot, asking voters to approve a parcel tax of $795 per home to stave off cuts to its academic and enrichment programs.

Alhambra Unified School District Superintendent Donna Perez said her district also faces a budget shortfall of $14.7 million over the next 18 months. She said officials are looking at all avenues to raise funds and save programs, including a parcel tax.

"We are looking for flexibilities. We want to keep class-size reduction because it is a priority for us," Perez said.

O'Connell predicted that, even after the Legislature approves a budget and the governor signs it, "there will be no winners in education."

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed budget calls for $11 billion in education cuts, meaning increased class sizes, teacher layoffs and the elimination of intervention programs that have proven successful in helping struggling students, he said.

Los Angeles County Superintendent of Schools Darlene Robles said the county could lose $3.8 billion. She added she's spoken to numerous superintendents, who say there is virtually nothing left cut from their local budgets.

---

PHOTO GALLERY

Education Forum

---

"We are tired of the budget rollercoaster," Robles said.

Several school officials wanted to know whether categorical funding - money targeted for specific programs or student populations - can be used for other purposes, like class-size reduction. The governor's proposal includes some leeway on how that money can be used, O'Connell said.

Some officials say the class-size reduction program should be altered - from 20 students per teacher to 23 per teacher, which would save millions of dollars.

To help districts save money, O'Connell said his office is suspending non-required compliance visits, in which state officials visit individual school sites to inspect programs, for one year. The visits cost districts money, because officials must prepare for them.

Instead, O'Connell said, schools should focus on students' academic progress.

 

State schools superintendent rallies school leaders to oppose cuts

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez | KPCC Public Radio 89.3FM

February 04, 2009
Listen

During a town hall meeting in Pasadena today, L.A. County school district leaders warned that students would bear the brunt of budget cuts proposed by Sacramento lawmakers. KPCC's Adolfo Guzman-Lopez has the story.

---

Adolfo Guzman-Lopez: State Schools Superintendent Jack O'Connell told school district superintendents and school board members that planned multi-billion dollar cuts would launch some unwelcome changes.

Superintendent Jack O'Connell: The proposal to reduce the school year, the learning opportunities for our students, by five days, I believe needs to be rejected.

Guzman-Lopez: O'Connell said that students in some industrialized countries are ahead of California students, because their academic year is 40 days longer.

Bob Bruesh, who's on the board of the Garvey School District in Rosemead, said that his students need access to computer technology, and that budget cuts would slow that effort.

Bob Bruesh: We are faced, in the near future, with an extremely large technology gap between rich and poor school districts. We're looking at each of our schools costing us upwards of $800 thousand per school to redo the electricity, just so they can use the technology.

Guzman-Lopez: Maureen Carlson is part of a foundation that raised $9 million this year for Pasadena Unified. She doesn't think there's enough public outcry to convince lawmakers to spare schools from the budget ax.

Maureen Carlson: There's a collection of the population that doesn't see care of the schools as their personal responsibility.

Guzman-Lopez: Carlson and others at the town hall meeting urged lawmakers to lower the percentage of votes required to pass municipal parcel taxes. That would make it easier for cities to raise money for schools, they argued.

School district superintendents plan a rally on the steps of the state capitol next week to oppose education budget cuts.

COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER OUSTED + LOS ANGELES COUNTY JUVENILE PROBATION CAMPS MAY TRY CHARTER SCHOOLS

 

STOP PRESS: The following email is from former LA County Board of Education Member Sophia Waugh, who was presumably ousted last Tuesday as part of what appears to be the attempted charter takeover of County Juvenile Court Schools.

November 24th, 2008

Dear Friends and Colleagues,

This letter is sent with sad news and deep disappointment that my 14 ½ years on the L.A County Board of Education came to an abrupt end by action taken in closed session last Tuesday by the Board of Supervisors.

This action was brought forward by Supervisor Antonovich (who appointed me).

Unfortunately, Supervisor Antonovich never gave me the opportunity to speak with him about his concerns despite my requests to do so or to the Board of Supervisors. Needless to say, I felt this was unfair, shocking and very hurtful after serving as his appointee for 14 ½ years.

Whatever the issues were I wanted to resolve them with him personally.

There are few things that I particularly want my friends and colleagues to know how proud I am for the things I have accomplished the past 14 1/2 years.

First, I have served on state-wide leadership positions with California County Boards of Education(CCBE)and California School Boards Association(CSBA). I have effectively networked linking LACOE with school district board members.

My tireless efforts encouraging collaboration between parents, principals, administration and probation has been successful. I have made myself available to all our LACOE staff, understanding our resources and programs, attended many meetings, visiting our community schools, special education schools, camps and halls often as possible.

I am proud of the role I played in the chartering of PTA models in our community schools, camps and halls.

We used the most successful avenue to connect our parents back to their children education and school.

My commitment to our Head Start parents has been to empower them to be a voice for their children, to ensure a strong Head Start program and to a successful transition for their children into K-12 education. I have encouraged Head Start parents to further their education so they can be self-sufficient and a model for their children.

Most important of all, I am thankful having had the opportunity to work with each of you. As two of my colleagues said to me; “as one door closes, another is waiting for me to open”. I am sure there are other greater challenges awaiting me and I look at this as another opportunity to serve.

My tenure on the LACOE Board has been exemplary and gratifying.

To each and everyone, thank you so much for your friendship, you will always be remembered.

 

 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY JUVENILE PROBATION CAMPS MAY TRY CHARTER SCHOOLS

Dissatisfied with the students' performance, county supervisors vote to create three charters within the system. Camp teachers question whether the shift would bring improvement in students' skills.

By Molly Hennessy-Fiske | LA Times Staff Writer

November 24, 2008  - Students held at Camp Joseph Scott, one of 19 juvenile probation camps in Los Angeles County, are some of the toughest to teach.
Locked in classrooms behind 12-foot fences topped with razor wire, many of the girls sport tattoos with the emblems of some of the region's most infamous gangs. Although most are high-school students, on average they read at a fourth-grade level and have fifth-grade math skills.

Photos: Camp school

 

Karen Berns has taught math there for 15 years. Over time, she learned to be vigilant. At the end of each class, Berns collects the girls' pencils. Otherwise, they might use them as weapons.

"I got my experience from years of teaching with these kids," said Berns, 55, who is known as "Granny" to her students. "It takes a long time to get that."

Now, the veteran teacher's future at the camp is uncertain. Earlier this month, Los Angeles County supervisors -- dissatisfied with teacher performance at the camps -- voted to create charter schools at Camp Scott, which houses about 100 girls, and nearby Camp Kenyon Scudder, which houses about 60.

Supervisors also approved a charter for boys, possibly at Camp Glenn Rockey in San Dimas, which houses about 80.

"All of these kids who are in camp now get the same model of education: the cookie-cutter model," Robert Taylor, Los Angeles County probation chief, told supervisors when he presented them with a 35-point plan to improve education at the camps last month.

But there are many unanswered questions -- including how much the charters will cost to operate and how they will be authorized and staffed. Among the options under consideration for operating the charters: Green Dot, a private company that runs several charters in Los Angeles, and Bonita Unified School District in San Dimas.

The charters would be the first in the county camp system. Education at the camps is supervised by the county Board of Education and managed by the state-funded Los Angeles County Office of Education. The office employs about 240 teachers, who average about 19 years of experience, according to state records.

Many teachers at the camps oppose the change, arguing that the switch to charters is an excuse for the county to hire cheaper, less-experienced, nonunion staff.

"I am proud of the instruction provided," said Darline P. Robles, superintendent of the county education office. "At the heart of these programs is a corps of teachers who are dedicated to making a difference with an incredibly challenging group of students in perhaps the most difficult of learning environments."

By law, school boards, not county governments, are responsible for authorizing charters. Once a charter is designed, including a proposed budget and staff, by law the board is required to get the signatures of at least half the number of teachers needed to staff the charter. If not enough teachers sign on, the board or county could petition the state for a waiver to start the charter, a move the county probation chief and supervisors are already exploring.

Supervisor Don Knabe, who backs bringing charter schools to the camps, says administrators and teachers with the county education office have been underperforming for years and need to be challenged.

"You need to have multiple educational opportunities for these kids," Knabe said.

On state tests, students scored below those in county-run probation schools in nearby counties. Last year, 21% passed a state high school exit exam in math, compared with 35% in Riverside County and 25% in San Bernardino County. In English exit exams last year, 24% passed, compared with 34% in Riverside and 28% in San Bernardino.

The most recent state assessment of the L.A. County-run schools, conducted in 2006-07, showed students completed about 5.2 credits a month, which is considered less than sufficient.

The push to improve education in the camps comes as the county juvenile detention system also faces increased pressure by federal Justice Department officials to improve safety. A scathing report on safety conditions by federal investigators, and a threat by the Justice Department to sue if the county failed to act, spurred the Board of Supervisors last week to announce plans to hire a team of independent monitors for the camps.

A committee made up of probation and county education office officials is reviewing charter plans this month, starting with the girls school, which could open within six months, Taylor said. The boys charter is not expected to open for a year, he said. Taylor is to report back to the board with a more detailed plan by Dec. 14.

Although many charter schools teach at-risk and violent youths, few instruct youths who are in detention, according to the California Charter Schools Assn. One that does is Five Keys Charter School, which the San Francisco Sheriff's Department started six years ago. The school says students enrolled there for at least a month increase academic levels by about two grades.

Some veteran teachers at Los Angeles probation camps say that if a charter school can demonstrate results, they would be willing to make the shift. But they question whether that would happen.

"We're dealing with a whole new breed of kids. These are gang kids. Tough kids," said Roger Gitlin, a union representative at Camp Scudder who has taught probationers for 18 years and opposes the charters. "Many of them have never even gone to school, kids who are born into a tough situation, and we are supposed to provide some sort of miracle formula."

Still, Gitlin said: "I understand Mr. Knabe's frustration. He wants results."

 

●●smf’s 2¢: embarrassingly. the overwhelming majority of LA County court school students are from LAUSD. 4LAKids is confused by what authority the Board of Supervisors creates these charter schools – that authority resides in the county and state Boards of Education exclusively. This action seems to violate the same constitutional provision violated in LAUSD v. Villaraigosa over AB1381 [STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE IX, SECTIONS 5, 6 AND 8 – dealing with the separation of municipal government from school governance.]   

And who is the charter petitioner?  The parents of the “new” charter schools? …or the teachers at the existing schools?