اینترنت

برچسب: California

  • California school districts are weighed down by new costs of old sexual assaults

    California school districts are weighed down by new costs of old sexual assaults


    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    School districts’ costs for compensating students victimized by sexual assault are escalating by billions of dollars. Many cases date back decades and were revived by a 2019 state law that widely expanded liability exposure to schools and other public agencies for past child sexual assaults. 

    An independent analysis of that law indicates a severe impact. Litigation will siphon tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars from general funds. Adverse jury verdicts and settlements could cost districts millions, potentially forcing layoffs and program reductions. Most districts will face record assessments to sustain shared insurance risk pools they contribute to. 

    In the worst case, districts will seek costly emergency state loans or bankruptcy protection — unless, the study said, the overall liability burden is spread “to protect the stability” of school districts.

    California’s elementary and secondary school system “will survive the challenge presented by the claims of childhood sexual assault. But individual school districts, charter schools and other agencies may not,” concluded the sober assessment of the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT), a state agency charged with preventing districts’ financial meltdowns.

    Troy Flint, chief of communications for the California School Boards Association, said FCMAT’s report should prompt action. “We have called upon the state to develop a safety net to defray costs that threaten school districts with insolvency. The report is another opportunity to reiterate this request,” he said.

    The report doesn’t name districts or describe how they’re coping. But one district that might not survive is Carpinteria Unified, a 1,900-student district south of Santa Barbara with a $42 million budget. 

    Next year, it’s scheduled for trial for four claims of sexual assault from the 1970s. The district lacks historical records, and the insurance company at the time went out of business, leaving the district on the hook, said Superintendent Diana Rigby. The abuser, a principal convicted of sexual assaults, has died, as have potential witnesses and the then superintendent, she said. Legal costs over several years will force budget cuts, she said. 

    “We all believe that victims deserve their due justice and compensation. Of course we do,” said Rigby. But “an unfavorable verdict would be catastrophic.”

    Among its 22 recommendations, FCMAT proposes the state create a voluntary victims’ compensation fund like the one for victims of the Sept.11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Victims would generally be compensated in a nonjudicial setting based on the crime’s severity and victims’ experiences. Legislators would decide if the state would share the funding burden.

    The Legislature unanimously passed Assembly Bill 218, which precipitated the surge in lawsuits, in October 2019. The law:

    • Extended the statute of limitations to file a child sexual assault lawsuit from age 26 (eight years after turning 18) to age 40.  
    • Extended the statute of limitations for those over 40 to within five years of when victims reasonably should have discovered repressed memories of a sexual assault.
    • Enabled victims of assaults whose statutes of limitations had expired to file lawsuits by Dec. 31, 2022.

    In 2023, the Legislature took the next step and passed Assembly Bill 452, which eliminated any statute of limitation for new lawsuits for sexual assaults filed after Jan. 1, 2024.

    AB 218’s just intentions, unknown costs

    The Legislature acted after a decade of shocking revelations and massive settlements, including by the Boy Scouts of America and the Catholic Church, as well as the $169 million that Los Angeles Unified paid on 150 claims of sexual abuse by one teacher at Miramonte Elementary. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles has acknowledged paying more than $1.5 billion from various settlements. 

    The Legislature signaled in AB 218 that schools, county offices of education, cities and public bodies with programs for children should be accountable for lifelong harm caused by sexual assaults under their watch.  The author, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzales, D-San Diego, said it would “confront the pervasive problem of cover-ups in institutions, from schools to sports leagues.”

    The Legislature’s fiscal analysis cited “unknown costs” but projected higher insurance premiums.

    Dave George, CEO of the Schools Excess Liability Fund (SELF), a public agency that provides school districts with catastrophic insurance coverage, added that districts had difficulty convincing legislators there would be “real money out of the pockets of districts” from rising costs of insurance and settlements. “The general response was, ‘Don’t worry about it — it’s just insurance,’” George said. 

    Hard information on claims is unavailable because there is no database on sexual assault outcomes. Creating a central repository is FCMAT’s first recommendation. The most recent data is from 2023.

    FCMAT’s best estimate of the dollar value of claims filed because of the law was $2 billion to $3 billion for school districts, including about $500 million facing Los Angeles Unified. Other public agencies’ costs will significantly exceed that value, the report said. 

    But with many claims still in the courts, the final damages are unknown. Mike Fine, FCMAT’s CEO and coauthor of the report, acknowledged they might be higher than estimated. The average claim is about $2.5 million per victim, Fine said.

    The estimate doesn’t include the cost of insurance, which has risen an estimated 700% — to about $255,000 for a 10,000-student district since the passage of AB 218, the report said, plus coverage now required of nonprofits and day care providers working in districts. It also doesn’t include new lawsuits being filed daily, said Fine. 

    George said SELF had two sexual assault claims open in 2020 and has received 400 claims for 600 plaintiffs since. SELF provides catastrophic insurance for claims up to $55 million for about 500 school districts. It notified them to expect $300 million to $400 million in supplementary assessments for ongoing and new AB 218 claims.

    George said that districts settled all but two recent lawsuits before going to trial. One that didn’t — and paid a stiff price — was Moreno Valley in Riverside County, the state’s 23rd largest district. A jury found it responsible for failing to protect two middle school students from a teacher’s sexual abuse in the 1990s. The jury levied $135 million in damages.

    Moreno Valley negotiated the price down to $45 million in order to pay a lump sum. SELF covered $15 million; Moreno Valley paid $30 million from its budget reserves.

    But the district isn’t out of the woods. The teacher remained on the payroll for two decades, and the district still faces four more potentially expensive lawsuits. The district declined to comment for this story.

    Adding to small districts’ financial vulnerability, said Fine, is that “a jury doesn’t distinguish between the size of the district and its ability to pay. Jurors can’t be told that information.” 

    Rising costs of ‘social inflation’

    The report said that the $100-plus million settlements contribute to “social inflation” — rising costs because of more lawsuits, plaintiff-friendly verdicts and larger jury awards.

    These factors also have created a “perilously unstable” commercial insurance market, which public agencies like SELF rely on for additional coverage, the report said.

    Fine said that districts are already issuing “judgment obligation bonds” to make restitution. No district has sought an emergency state bailout as a last resort, but Fine said that will happen.

    “Generally speaking, the smaller the district, the higher that risk,” Fine said. 

    The report suggests that the Legislature revise statutes to lengthen payoffs and settlement deadlines. It urges lawmakers to immediately study a victim compensation fund. But the focus is on creating “zero tolerance” of sexual assaults by mandating student training to promote awareness, expanding work history verification and increasing staff training.

    Fine will present the report at legislative hearings. Leilani Aguinaldo, senior director of government relations for School Services of California, which advises districts, welcomes that opportunity. “It’s an excellent report. Schools have no resources for claims from decades ago,” she said. 

    Flint added, “The fears of schools are real.”





    Source link

  • New Stanford database tracks learning loss, gain in California and districts nationwide

    New Stanford database tracks learning loss, gain in California and districts nationwide


    A student writes math problems in a fourth grade classroom at William Jefferson Clinton Elementary in Compton on Feb. 6, 2025.

    Credit: AP Photo/Eric Thayer

    A unique database that enables people to compare standardized test scores among nearly all districts and states found that California experienced slightly less learning loss than the national average in the four years following the 2020 pandemic.

    The Education Recovery Scorecard, which researchers from Stanford University, Harvard University and Dartmouth College developed, also identified those districts that have escalated learning recovery and those that had fallen farthest behind. 

    Those whose test scores improved in either math, reading or both, include Compton Unified and Monterey Peninsula, both with high proportions of low-income students, as well as Chino Valley Unified and Bonita Unified, whose students gained nearly a half-grade level of learning compared with pre-pandemic 2019.

    The Associated Press, in conjunction with the researchers, published Tuesday a wealth of information from 43 states with 8,718 districts for which data was available, including the nearly 1,000 districts in California. They affirm what other analyses of states and the nation have found: The decline in scores in both reading and math, as a result of the pandemic, was severe.

    Although no state reached their pre-pandemic scores in both math and reading, many individual districts did. The scorecard found that 31% of California students attended districts scoring above 2019 levels in math, with 12% of students in districts scoring above 2019 levels in reading, and 10% in districts that have recovered in both.

    That’s significantly higher than the national average: Only 17% of students nationally in grades three to eight are in districts whose average math score on the scorecard was above that of 2019.

    However, keep in mind that California had much more ground to make up. In 2019, California’s average score in math was already half a grade behind the national average. While in 2024, the gap between California and the nation had narrowed to 36% in math, scores nationally and in California both had lost ground. As a result, California’s 2019 score in math was 82% of a year of learning below the 2019 national average.

    Some of the biggest districts, including San Bernardino City, Long Beach and San Juan remain more than half a grade equivalent behind in math from five years before.

    Reading scores followed a similar trend. In 2019, the gap between the nation and California was 29%; in 2024, it had narrowed to 22%, yet had dropped to 69% of a grade below the 2019 national average.

    As the state’s two largest districts with nearly 10% of California’s enrollment, Los Angeles and San Diego may have lifted the state’s overall average. Los Angeles in 2024 was within a few percentage points of its 2019 scores in reading and math; San Diego’s pandemic decline was significantly less than the state’s.

    The scorecard makes comparisons possible on a single scale based on percentages of an expected year of growth. It equalizes states’ scores by aligning them to their results on the National Assessment of Academic Progress (NAEP), the common test that a representative sample of students in all states take every two years.

    Going Deeper

    The Associated Press analyzed data from the Education Recovery Scorecard, produced by Harvard’s Tom Kane and Stanford’s Sean Reardon, which uses state test score data to compare districts across states and regions on post-pandemic learning recovery. The AP provided data analysis and reporting for this story.

    Researchers from Stanford, Harvard and Dartmouth created the Education Recovery Scorecard using a longitudinal database developed by the Stanford Graduate School of Education. Because states use different tests with different measures for determining what constitutes proficiency, apples-to-apples comparisons of learning losses and gains across the nation normally can’t be made. Some states’ scores for proficiency are “easier” to achieve than in other states.

    The scorecard affirmed trends that others have found by analyzing NAEP and California’s Smarter Balanced scores and results nationally. 

    • Achievement gaps by income and race and ethnicity widened during the pandemic. The highest-income districts were nearly four times more likely to recover in both reading and math than the lowest-income districts. The disparity in math scores between students in affluent and low-income districts grew by 11% since the start of the pandemic; the disparity in scores between students in predominantly non-minority and predominantly minority districts grew by 15%.
    • High rates of absenteeism, especially in high poverty districts, have slowed recovery. One of the report’s recommendations is to recruit mayors, employers and other community leaders; total responsibility shouldn’t rest with schools, the report said. Help could include launching public information campaigns, funding extracurricular activities to draw students to school; and assisting with transportation, the report said.
    • Federal Covid relief for schools, especially $122 billion from the American Rescue Plan passed in 2021, appeared to stem even bigger learning losses in the higher poverty districts — by about 10% of a grade equivalent. But how districts spent the money mattered. In examining federal spending in California, which required more extensive reporting on expenditures, researchers found that spending on intensive tutoring and after-school and summer school programs tended to yield the most effective results. 

    “The slide in average NAEP scores masks a pernicious inequality: Scores have declined far more in America’s middle- and low-income communities than in its wealthy ones. The good news is that it could have been worse: The federal investment in public schools during the pandemic paid off, limiting academic losses in high-poverty districts,” professor Sean Reardon, faculty director of the Educational Opportunity Project at Stanford and a lead researcher on the scorecard, told the AP.

    Along with Compton Unified, whose impressive improvement started before Covid and was undeterred by it, Bonita Unified, a 10,000-student district where 36% of students are eligible for free or reduced meals, raised both reading and math scores to a third of a grade level above 2019 results. In a letter to parents, Bonita Superintendent Matt Wien praised “the sense of purpose that is felt throughout the district and drives our students and employees alike.” He also pointed to hiring elementary school intervention teachers and comprehensive instruction during summer programs.

    Chino Valley Unified scores rose in 2024 to 43% of a grade above 2019 in math and 34% in reading. Deputy Superintendent Grace Park cited the collaboration of teacher teams that developed an essential set of learning standards in every grade, followed by designing lessons and assessments, then monitoring their effectiveness. She also noted that the district was the first in San Bernardino County to return to the classroom when the pandemic eased.

    Economist Tom Kane, faculty director of the Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard and a collaborator on the scorecard, said it is essential for districts to apply lessons of the recovery. He and Reardon stressed focusing on which of the “science of reading” reforms that districts have tried most improved early literacy.

    “The rescue phase is over. The federal relief dollars are gone. It is time to pivot from short-term recovery to longer-term challenges such as reducing absenteeism and addressing the slide in literacy,” Kane said.

    One advantage California has is a $6.8 billion pot of state money that is replacing the expired federal Covid funds. Distributed based on districts’ low-income enrollment, districts can use the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant through 2027-28 on tutoring and other research-proven strategies, along with mental health and student well-being. The funding is a second chance.





    Source link

  • California college leaders anxious, uncertain as Trump administration orders end to diversity programs

    California college leaders anxious, uncertain as Trump administration orders end to diversity programs


    San Diego City College’s Chicano-Latina graduation ceremony in 2024 is the kind of event the Trump administration is targeting in its efforts to stamp out diversity, equity and inclusion policies on campuses.

    Credit: San Diego City College

    California college leaders are responding with a mix of uncertainty, resistance and worry over a U.S. Department of Education order to eliminate any race-based programs by the end of the month.

    The “dear colleague” letter, published Friday by the department’s Office for Civil Rights, goes far beyond telling colleges they can’t consider race as a factor in admissions. It says colleges that factor race into “admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life” are in violation of federal law. 

    The letter gives colleges until the end of the month to get rid of such programs or risk losing federal funds, though it doesn’t specify which funding would be held back. 

    Some officials at California’s colleges and universities said Tuesday that they have no plans to abolish those types of programs in dorms, graduation ceremonies, resource centers and other areas. However, others were still determining their next steps amid great uncertainty. Many are concerned about how possible funding losses might hurt campuses and how students might be harmed if there are cuts to programs.

    Greg Smith, chancellor of the San Diego Community College District, said he has “no concern about our compliance in anything that we’re currently doing.” He noted that the district already complies with Proposition 209, the 1996 ballot measure that banned public universities in California from considering race in admissions and giving other race-based preferential treatment.

    He added, however, that it would be demoralizing for students if colleges were forced to get rid of programs designed to “create inclusivity and belonging based on culture and identity.”

    “I think it creates a sense of fear that the progress that’s been made in the civil rights going back to the mid-’60s is starting to be undermined,” he added. 

    The district, one of the largest in the state, is home to San Diego City, San Diego Mesa and San Diego Miramar colleges. Each year, the colleges hold a Rite of Passage Ceremony, a celebration meant to honor the achievements of Black students graduating or transferring. 

    San Diego Mesa also holds a Raza Grad Ceremony to honor Latino, Hispanic and Indigenous students, while San Diego City holds a similar event and also has a UMOJA Community offering counseling and tutoring to Black students hoping to transfer to a four-year university.

    Those programs and other cultural initiatives will continue, Smith said, though he acknowledged that he is concerned about possibly losing federal funding. 

    The college is currently planning how it would “backfill those funds” if it loses any federal dollars, such as by using reserves in the short term. “We’re really committed to ensuring those programs continue,” Smith said.

    The University of California similarly suggested in a statement that the order would not immediately impact its 10 campuses, which have a number of racially themed programs. The letter serves as “guidance on the Department’s interpretation of existing anti-discrimination laws and does not name any specific institution,” UC said in its statement. 

    “It indicates how OCR intends to enforce these legal requirements. Given the UC’s compliance with Prop. 209, we do not use race-based preferences in our practices,” UC added. 

    UC could be especially vulnerable because it receives nearly $6 billion annually in federal funds for research and other program support and at least $1.7 billion in student financial aid, including Pell grants and work study programs. That does not include federal funds for medical care across UC’s hospitals. 

    UC Riverside, which has prided itself on being one of the nation’s most diverse universities, says on its website that it was the first campus to have a professionally staffed Black student resource center and the first UC campus to have an office serving Native American students. 

    Many campuses across UC and the 23-campus California State University (CSU) also have racially themed dormitory floors, such as the African Black Diaspora Living Learning Community at UC San Diego. The mission of the community is to “establish an environment of personal and academic excellence through the affirmation and celebration of Blackness in its various expressions,” according to the campus website.

    CSU was still uncertain of potential impacts as of Tuesday. The system faces its own vulnerabilities if federal funding were to be cut: It estimates that more than $511 million in research expenditures were funded by federal agencies during the 2022-23 academic year.

    “As this type of action is unprecedented, we are consulting with the California Attorney General and higher education partners across the country to better understand the statewide impact of this letter,” said Amy Bentley-Smith, a CSU spokesperson.

    A spokesperson for the chancellor’s office overseeing California’s 116 community colleges said the office is “in conversations with state and federal partners and providing colleges as much clarity, guidance and support as we can.” Colleges are encouraged to “continue their critical work in alignment with state and federal laws,” the spokesperson added.

    Some campuses and college districts declined to comment altogether as they were still assessing the potential impacts of the order. That includes Sacramento State University, which has been a vocal leader in programming aimed at helping Black students, and the Los Angeles Community College District, the state’s largest district. 





    Source link

  • ‘A step backwards’: How federal threats to DEI are impacting California schools 

    ‘A step backwards’: How federal threats to DEI are impacting California schools 


    Credit: Carlos Kosienski/Sipa via AP Images

    Tough decisions lie ahead for schools across California as the federal government cracks down on diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.  

    The latest measure came in the form of a letter issued Friday by the U.S. Department of Education, giving K-12 schools across the country two options: to eliminate programs focused on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) within two weeks, or face unspecified cuts in federal funding.  

    “I fully anticipate that it will have a chilling effect on school districts, but also colleges and universities,” said Royel Johnson, who leads the University of Southern California Race and Equity Center’s National Assessment of Collegiate Campus Climates. 

    The Department of Education’s letter isn’t law — nor is it legal, Johnson said. 

    However, many advocates and community members say they are concerned that more and more districts will gut their diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives out of fear and deprive students from marginalized backgrounds of the support they need to succeed in the classroom and beyond.

    “We often think about California as being protected from this larger right wing movement,” Johnson said. “But as we saw with changing patterns and demographic votes in the presidential election, I think there are many people in California who are wrestling with this conservative movement and who are afraid of it — and who are proactively or preemptively making decisions.” 

    ‘An underlying disconnect’: The letter 

    The Department of Education’s letter opens with the words “Dear Colleague,” but the ensuing message takes on a different tone. 

    “Rather than engaging in that work of acknowledging and affirming educators, what the Trump administration has done thus far is to express hostility and disdain,” said John Rogers, a professor at UCLA’s School of Education and Information Studies and associate dean for research/public scholarship. 

    The letter specifically claims that white and Asian American students, including those from lower income backgrounds, have been discriminated against and that “educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism.’”

    Increasing schools’ scores on the Nation’s Report Card has been a justification for some of the administration’s changes, according to Rogers. 

    But instead of boosting student performance, Rogers maintains that the directive could “throw K-12 schools into further tumult” due to the high fiscal costs of culture wars. Just last year, conflicts surrounding race and LGBTQ+ issues cost schools more than $3 billion nationwide. 

    “They’re pushing superintendents and those underneath the level of the superintendency to spend time seeking out legal counsel, talking with other educational leaders, trying to figure out, ‘What do we do? What are we doing now that might be considered problematic? Do we need to take action, etc?’” Rogers said.  

    “All of that time and energy, and to the extent that they’re seeking out costly legal counsel, that has real costs associated with it. It’s pushing people away from the important work of improving student learning and supporting student well-being.” 

    While Rogers maintained that the letter was hostile in tone, he also described it as vague and confusing — a sentiment shared by many.  

    Rogers said: “If I was a superintendent, I would want to know: ‘Can my principals bring together a group of Asian American students to talk about whether they’ve experienced anti-Asian hate? Could my district invite African American parents to share their oral histories about growing up in my community as part of African American History Month, or, for that matter, can we even celebrate African American History Month?” 

    Superintendents, he said, “don’t have enough information — yet they’re being given two weeks to either take dramatic action or not, of which they have really no sense of what that would mean.”

    ‘Uncharted territory’ for California districts  

    With new, unclear circumstances on the horizon, more questions than answers are percolating through school districts across California. 

    Nikki Henry, spokesperson for Fresno Unified School District, said Tuesday that the district and its attorneys are reviewing the letter to understand its impact. 

    Fresno Unified’s school board in 2020 passed a resolution declaring the district an anti-racist institution that would “examine and confront biases” and in January reaffirmed the district as a safe place for all students, including immigrant students and families.

    That mindset and approach may put Fresno Unified, which received around $238 million in federal funds this school year, in jeopardy of losing such funding under the new administration.

    With nearly 93% of its students identifying as members of minority communities, the district has implemented “strong” diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, Henry said. Their DEI policy ensures that students have equitable access to the district’s programs and services, that the curriculum reflects and celebrates diversity and that there are sufficient academic, social-emotional and behavioral supports. 

    Further south, administrators in Los Angeles Unified, the state’s largest district, have also expressed support for students of all backgrounds — a move that is lauded by Evelyn Aleman, the organizer of Our Voice/Nuestra Voz, a bilingual Facebook group largely made up of parents and advocates.

    “In terms of advocating for and supporting the difference between populations that it serves, (LAUSD])really does try to do that, so … I think we’re going to be OK. I think we have a district that gets us.”

    In a statement to EdSource, a Los Angeles Unified spokesperson said the district “adheres to all federal and state law and guidance” — and that if there are discrepancies between the two, they would be resolved through the state. 

    However, last July, Parents Defending Education, a Virginia-based conservative group, filed a complaint with the Office for Civil Rights against the Los Angeles Unified School District for its Black Student Achievement Plan. 

    Months later, the district watered down the language surrounding the program. 

    And some members of LAUSD’s larger community, including United Teachers Los Angeles President Cecily Myart-Cruz, said they fear that this decision could signal how the district might respond to directives from the federal government. 

    “If I only had to go on that (decision regarding the Black Student Achievement Plan), then I would say I’m concerned,” Myart-Cruz said. “I believe in our students. … I know that UTLA, we’re going to stand right alongside our students and our community. … If we put resources in for our students, then it helps everyone.” 

    Other districts like Clovis Unified, however, maintain that they will not be impacted, according to spokesperson Kelly Avants. 

    Based on the way Clovis Unified is interpreting the Education Department’s letter, Avants said affected districts are likely those with hiring practices or scholarships with DEI guidelines or selection criteria based solely on race or gender. 

    Avants added that all Clovis Unified activities to celebrate different cultures are open to the entire student population. 

    “We’ve not gone one direction or the other,” Avants said. “We really have tried to be sensitive to our programs being holistic versus centrally focused.” 

    What’s at stake

    Experts and teachers have continually emphasized that diversity, equity and inclusion programs enrich students’ learning and that they also play a critical role in students feeling like they belong. 

    “DEI provides mechanisms for addressing issues of safety and security for students who sometimes experience physical harm, psychological harm,” Johnson said. “But, if we start removing the very mechanisms that are designed to address these issues, we’re going to see higher reports and students having concerns around their safety at school.” 

    He added, “If students feel a sense of connectedness and belonging to the school environment, they’re more likely to be retained, they’re more likely to come to school on time and persist toward their goals.”

    Several indicators of student success, from student attendance rates to engagement, rise when DEI programs are implemented, he said. 

    And in the classroom, Aleman from Our Voice/Nuestra Voz, emphasized the importance of learning about the contributions of immigrants from various backgrounds. 

    “We’re at a stage of global interaction that requires that we understand … the rich history and contributions of immigrants and different populations,” Aleman said. “We are a heterogeneous culture. … and we don’t understand why the administration doesn’t understand that.” 

    Pushing back 

    While the Department of Education’s letter focuses on race, civil rights protections — including through diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives — support students from various identities based on other factors, including gender, disability and age, according to Amir Whitaker, senior policy counsel of the ACLU of Southern California.

    And Johnson said marginalized groups, including those who are LGBTQ+ and first generation, could also be impacted by potential cuts to DEI.

    “I hope that school district leaders and leaders of college and universities will not back down from this moment — and lean into the institutional values that have animated their work for years prior to this erroneous sort of guidance that is designed to threat and intimidate,” Johnson said. “If we all roll back and back down at this moment, then our students will suffer.” 

    Whitaker added that the very policies that the letter cites — like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — were victories that “people fought and died for.” 

    The Trump administration’s action, he said, is a “a step backwards in this nation’s journey towards equality and justice.”

    “If California backs down,” Johnson said, “I wonder also what message that sends to the rest of the country, that this ultra-progressive place is already making concessions and their sort of commitments to do DEI, what that might mean for less progressive places who are figuring out where they fit within this conversation.” 





    Source link

  • What does threatened federal funding do for California K-12 schools? | Quick Guide

    What does threatened federal funding do for California K-12 schools? | Quick Guide


    Students read and write at Frank Sparkes Elementary in Winton School District in Madera County.

    Credit: Zaidee Stavely / EdSource

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    The U.S. Department of Education alarmed school leaders last week by threatening to withhold federal funding from schools and colleges that do not abandon “diversity, equity and inclusion” programs. President Donald Trump has also threatened to withhold federal funding from states or schools that allow transgender students to play sports on teams that align with their gender identity.

    It is unclear exactly which federal funding could be targeted to be cut from schools. There are several different educational programs funded by the federal government. Many of these programs have been approved in federal legislation since the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and have continued in the current Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

    California K-12 schools received about $8 billion in federal funding in 2024-25, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office — about 6% of total K-12 funding. Federal funding may represent a much larger percentage of the budget in some districts, particularly those in rural areas.

    Elizabeth Sanders, a spokesperson for the California Department of Education, emphasized that federal education funds “are appropriations made by Congress and would need to be changed by Congress, not by an executive order.”

    Below are some of the largest K-12 programs funded by the U.S. Department of Education. All numbers were provided by the California Department of Education for the fiscal year 2024-25, unless otherwise specified.

    Students from low-income families (ESSA, Title I, Part A) — $2.4 billion

    California school districts and charter schools with large numbers of students from low-income families receive funding from Title I, intended to make sure children from low-income families have the same opportunities as other students to receive a high-quality education. Schools where at least 40% of students are from low-income families can use these funds to improve education for the entire school. Otherwise, schools are expected to use the funds to serve low-income students achieving the lowest scores on state assessments.

    Students with disabilities (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) — $1.5 billion

    This funding is specifically to help school districts provide special education and services to children with disabilities. Under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, children with disabilities are entitled to a free public education in the “least restrictive environment” — meaning as close as possible to the education offered to peers who do not have disabilities.

    The state also receives funding for serving infants and toddlers with disabilities and their families and preschoolers with disabilities.

    Training, recruiting and retaining teachers and principals (ESSA, Title II) — $232 million 

    These grants, called Supporting Effective Instruction, can be used for reforming teacher and principal certification programs, supporting new teachers, providing additional training for existing teachers and principals, and reducing class size by hiring more teachers. The goal is to make sure that all students have high-quality principals and teachers in their schools.

    English learners and immigrant students (ESSA, Title III, Part A) — $157 million

    California schools use this funding to help recent immigrant students and students who speak languages other than English at home to learn to speak, read and write English fluently, to learn other subjects such as math and science, and to meet graduation requirements.

    Student support and academic enrichment (ESSA, Title IV) — $152 million

    These grants are intended to make sure all students have access to a well-rounded education. Programs can include college and career guidance, music and arts education, science, technology, engineering and mathematics, foreign language, and U.S. history, among other topics. In addition, funding can be used for wellness programs, including prevention of suicide, violence, bullying, drug abuse and child sexual abuse. Finally, funds can be used for improving the use of technology in the classroom, particularly for providing students in rural, remote and underserved areas expanded access to technology.

    Before- and after-school programs (ESSA, Title IV, Part B) — $146 million 

    The 21st Century Community Learning Centers grants are for expanding or starting before- and after-school programs that provide tutoring or academic help in math, science, English language arts and other subjects. These grants are intended particularly to help students who attend high-poverty and low-performing schools.

    Migratory students (ESSA, Title I, Part C) — $120 million

    These funds are used for programs to help students whose parent or guardian is a migratory worker in the agricultural, dairy, lumber, or fishing industries and whose family has moved during the past three years.

    Impact Aid (ESSA, Title VII) — $82.2 million, according to the Education Law Center

    These programs help fund school districts that have lost property tax revenue because of property owned by the federal government, including Native American lands, and that have large numbers of children living on Native American land, military bases, or federal low-rent housing. The money can be used for school construction and maintenance, in addition to teacher salaries, advanced placement classes, tutoring, and supplies such as computers and textbooks.

    Career and technical education (Perkins V) — $77 million

    This funding is aimed at programs that help prepare students for careers and vocations, including “pathway programs” in high schools.

    State assessments (ESSA, Title I, Part B) — $27 million

    This funding is used to develop and administer state assessments, such as the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress and the English Language Proficiency Assessments of California.

    Children in juvenile justice system and foster care (ESSA, Title I, Part D) — $17 million

    This funding is labeled for “prevention and intervention programs for children and youth who are neglected, delinquent, or at-risk.” It is intended to improve education for children in juvenile detention facilities and other facilities run by the state.

    Homeless children (McKinney-Vento Act) — $15 million

    This federal funding is specifically to serve children who are experiencing homelessness, as defined by the McKinney-Vento Act, which includes children whose families are sharing housing with others because they lost housing or because of economic hardship. The funds can be spent on a variety of different things, including identifying homeless students, tutoring and instruction, training teachers and staff to understand homeless students’ needs and rights, referring students to health services, and transportation to help students get to school.

    Small rural schools (ESSA, Title V, Part B, 1) — $7.9 million, according to the Education Law Center

    These federal funds are available to rural school districts that enroll fewer than 600 students or are located in counties with fewer than 10 people per square mile.

    School breakfast and lunch (child nutrition programs) — $5.7 million

    This funding from the U.S. Department of Education supplements a much bigger amount of funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture ($2.6 billion in 2023, according to the Public Policy Institute of California), to help provide free breakfast and lunch to low-income students during the school year, meals and snacks during after-school programs, and meals for low-income children during the summer.

    Low-income rural schools (ESSA, Title V, Part B, 2) — $5 million

    These federal funds are available to rural school districts where at least 20% of students are from families with incomes below the poverty line.

    Native American students (ESSA, Title VI) — $4.6 million, according to the Education Law Center

    This funding goes to districts for programs to help Native American students, for example, tutoring in reading, math or science, after-school programs, Native language classes, programs that increase awareness about going to college or career preparation, or programs to improve attendance and graduation rates.

    Literacy (ESSA, Title II, Part B) — $3.8 million 

    This is funding for California’s Literacy Initiative, which seeks to ensure that all children are reading well by third grade.

    Competitive grants for teacher training, community schools, desegregation and more

    The U.S. Department of Education also has grants for which school districts can apply directly, rather than going through the state Department of Education. These are harder to track, but many school districts in California have received funding from these grants. 

    For example, in 2023, the department sent out $14 million in grants to help districts desegregate schools, some of which went to Oakland Unified. In 2024, Congress put aside $150 million for grants to help school districts set up full-service community schools, offering wraparound services to students and families.

    Other grants have focused on teacher preparation, career pathways and other issues. The U.S. Department of Education announced Monday that it had already canceled $600 million in grants for teacher training.

    California Department of Education staff

    According to the California Department of Education, the department receives federal funding for 875 positions, about half of which are fully funded by the federal government.





    Source link

  • California takes a big step in how it measures school performance, but there’s still more to do

    California takes a big step in how it measures school performance, but there’s still more to do


    Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

    Accountability has been a central plank in California’s — and our nation’s — school reform efforts for over two decades. Over nearly that entire period, California has been criticized (including by me) for being one of the few states that does not include a measure of student achievement growth in our accountability system. The current approach, exemplified in the California School Dashboard, rates schools on their average performance levels on the state’s standardized tests, and on the difference between the school’s average performance this year and last year.

    But the state doesn’t have, and has never had, a student-level growth model for test scores. Student-level growth models are important because they do a much better job than the state’s existing measures of capturing school effectiveness at improving student achievement. This is because growth models directly compare students to themselves over time, asking how much individual children are learning each year and how this compares across schools and to established benchmarks for annual learning. The crude difference models the state currently displays in the dashboard could give the wrong idea about school performance, for instance, if there are enrollment changes over time in schools (as there have been since the pandemic).

    Growth models can help more fairly identify schools that are often overlooked because they are getting outsize results with underserved student groups. In other words, they send better, more accurate signals to report card users and to the state Department of Education about which schools need support and for which students. Along with Kansas, California has been the last holdout state in adopting a report card that highlights a growth model.

    Though the state’s task force on accountability and continuous improvement, on which I served, wrapped up its work and recommended a growth model almost nine years ago, the process of adopting and implementing a growth model has been — to say the least — laborious and drawn-out. Still, I was delighted to see that the California Department of Education (CDE) has finally started providing growth model results in the California School Dashboard! This is a great step forward for the state.

    Beyond simply including the results in the dashboard, there are some good things about how the state is reporting these growth model results. The growth model figures present results in a way I think many users will understand (points above typical growth), and results for different student groups can be easily viewed and compared.

    There is a clear link to resources to help understand the growth model, too. The state should be commended for its efforts to make the results clear and usable in this way.

    It doesn’t take a detailed look at the dashboard to see, however, that there are some important fixes that the State Board of Education should require — and CDE should adopt — as soon as possible. Broadly, I think these fixes fall into two categories: technical fixes about presentation and data availability, and more meaningful fixes about how the growth model results are used.

    First, the data are currently buried too deeply for the average user to even find them. As far as I can tell, the growth model results do not appear on the landing page for an individual school. You have to click through using the “view more details” button on some other indicator, and only then can you see the growth model results. The growth model results should, at minimum, be promoted to the front page, even if they are put alongside the other “informational purposes indicator” for science achievement. A downloadable statewide version of the growth model results should also be made available, so that researchers and other interested analysts can examine trends. Especially in light of the long shadow of Covid on California’s students, we need to know which schools could benefit from more support to recover.

    Second, the state should prioritize the growth model results in actually creating schools’ dashboard ratings. Right now, the color-coded dashboard rating is based on schools’ status (their average scale score) and change (the difference between this year’s average score and last year’s). It would be much more appropriate to replace the change score with these growth model results.

    There are many reasons why a growth model is superior, but the easiest to understand is that the “change” metrics the state currently uses can be affected by compositional changes in the student body (such as which kinds of students are moving into and out of the school). Researchers are unanimous that student-level growth models are superior to these change scores at accurately representing school effectiveness. Even for California’s highly mobile student population, growth models can accommodate student mobility and give “credit” to the schools most responsible for each child’s learning during that academic year.

    To be sure, I think there are other ways the dashboard can likely be improved to make it more useful to parents and other interested users. These suggestions have been detailed extensively over the years, including in a recent report that dinged the state for making it difficult to see how children are recovering post-Covid.

    The adoption of a growth model is a great sign that the state wishes to improve data transparency and utility for California families. I hope it is just the first in a series of improvements in California’s school accountability systems.

    •••

    Morgan Polikoff is a professor at the University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • California extends state financial aid deadline until April 2

    California extends state financial aid deadline until April 2


    Sierra Community College in Rocklin.

    Credit: Sierra College / Flickr

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    California officials are giving students an extra month to meet the state financial aid priority deadline, saying fewer high school seniors have finished paperwork so far this year due to delays in the Free Application for Federal Student Aid and uncertainty about federal education policy and immigration enforcement.

    The California Student Aid Commission, whose executive director approved the 30-day extension from March 3 to April 2, reported a 25% drop in the number of California high school seniors who have completed financial aid applications this year compared with the same point in 2023.

    The April 2 state priority deadline is the date by which students planning to attend a four-year institution must file applications for most state aid programs, including the Cal Grant. Students seeking Cal Grants to attend a community college can apply through Sept. 2. Students have until June 30, 2026, to complete the application for federal awards like Pell Grants.

    The decline in completed applications is due in part to a two-month delay to the start of the federal 2025-26 financial aid application cycle, commission officials said. The Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, opened on Dec. 1 following the troubled rollout of the 2024-25 FAFSA. The form is typically available to students on Oct. 1.

    People who work directly with students also say that concerns about the administration of President Donald Trump are giving some families pause about whether to file for federal student aid this year. The decision is especially fraught for students with undocumented family members in light of Trump administration rhetoric promising an unprecedented crackdown on unauthorized immigration. Federal law bars the use of data submitted through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, for any use other than determining financial aid, but both the National College Attainment Network and the California Student Aid Commission have cautioned mixed-status families that the federal form may not protect their data going forward. The California commission has recommended that families fearful of federal immigration enforcement complete the California Dream Act Application, or CADAA, a state financial aid program that does not share information with the federal government. 

    “Some of the parents are saying, ‘If they take me, they take me. But my kid is going to apply for financial aid for college’,” said Jasmin Pivaral, senior director of college culture at the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, an organization that works with five high schools in Los Angeles Unified. “It’s been really sad and really challenging to hear that parents are having to make this difficult decision, and we have no sense right now what kind of mental toll this is taking on students.”

    The Trump administration has also threatened to shut down the U.S. Department of Education and pursued other efforts to freeze federal funding. Linda Doughty, the director of the San Diego and Imperial Counties Cal-SOAP Consortium, which works to boost college participation, said some families have mistakenly concluded that federal student aid will not be available next school year as a result.

    “Our parents thought they canceled financial aid,” said Doughty, whose group is helping to organize several free financial aid workshops at area schools this weekend. “That’s misinformation.”

    Doughty and her Cal-SOAP colleagues are among the organizations around the state working with the commission to host Cash for College workshops where students and their families can get advice from financial aid experts to file the FAFSA or CADAA. As of Thursday morning, there were 140 such workshops scheduled virtually as well as in person in cities including Bakersfield, Norwalk and San Bernardino.

    EdSource reporter Zaidee Stavely contributed to this article.





    Source link

  • How will changes in federal policy impact California education? Stay up to date here

    How will changes in federal policy impact California education? Stay up to date here


    Despite Congress working through a spending deal to maintain federal grant funding for Head Start over the next six months, staff members at Head Start are starting to fear for the program’s future and the potential impacts on the Bay Area’s preschoolers from disadvantaged backgrounds, the East Bay Times reported. 

    So far, there aren’t any signs that Head Start will face cuts. But Melanee Cottrill, the executive director of Head Start California told the East Bay Times that “the broad, overarching challenge is all the uncertainty.” 

    “Even in areas as relatively close-knit and compact as the Bay Area, every program is a little different to meet the needs of the community — whatever those are — in the places where they are,” Cottrill told the Times. “Regardless of what kind of organization you are, losing any chunk of your funding would be a challenge.”

    Funding approved on March 14 isn’t enough to help Head Start employees keep up with cost of living increases. And earlier this month, a Head Start program run by the Santa Clara County’s Office of Education had to hand out pink slips. 

    Meanwhile, in February alone, roughly 3,650 children in Contra Costa County received subsidized preschool. 

    Contra Costa County’s Employment and Human Services Department director, Marla Stuart, told the Times said several actions taken by the federal government — including threats to reject grants that support Diversity, Equity and Inclusion — have already impacted the program. 

    She also pointed to Project 2025 and claims that Head Start’s federal office is “fraught with scandal and abuse” and should be cut. 

    “I don’t take the ‘see no evil, hear no evil’ approach,” said Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia at a board meeting, according to the Times. “We’re not going to know until the end, but if we want to advocate to say, ‘here’s the impact of these cuts,’ no one is stopping me from talking about that.”

    Several legal experts, according to the Times, have said that grant money for Head Start isn’t in jeopardy, unless the program is specifically cut. 

    “I’ve got lists of where possible funding impacts can occur, and I think we have a responsibility to talk about that,” Gioia said, according to the Times. “We’re not creating fear, we’re talking about reality.”

    —EdSource staff





    Source link

  • Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners

    Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners


    This interactive map shows kindergartners’ vaccination rates at more than 6,000 public and private schools across California. According to the state health department, at least 95% of students need the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine to maintain herd immunity and prevent outbreaks. Yet in many parts of the state — including areas around Sacramento, Oakland, the Central Valley, and Los Angeles — vaccination rates fall short of that threshold, raising concerns about community vulnerability.

    Data source: California Department of Public Health and EdSource Analysis





    Source link

  • California school vaccinations database



    Find out how many students are vaccinated at your school



    Source link