In 2013–14, California enacted an ambitious—and essential—reform to improve educational equity by directing state resources to districts and schools that educate large numbers of economically disadvantaged students. The reform is called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); it allocates funding to school districts based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status and provides greater flexibility to use the allocated funds than the previous school funding formula allowed. In addition to the LCFF, which is based on average daily attendance (ADA), districts receive funds based on the proportion of students they serve who are English learners, income eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and foster youth. The equity multiplier, a new policy passed in 2023, is designed to provide even more funding for disadvantaged students.

English learners (ELs) face diverse challenges during the pandemic, with varied educational needs and health concerns. The forthcoming academic year will likely amplify the academic gap between EL and non-EL students due to limited access to distance learning. To address this, several policy recommendations are proposed. Universal basic income, health care, and tech access are vital for EL families, especially for those in low-income or undocumented situations. Distance learning must cater to ELs by providing devices, multilingual content, and non-tech learning options. Improved communication with EL families and leveraging their cultural assets are crucial. Extending learning time for ELs, promoting collaboration among teachers, and hiring bilingual family members as aides or tutors are recommended. Assessing returning students' academic status and monitoring funds allocated for ELs' needs are vital. These policy suggestions aim to address EL education challenges amidst the pandemic, stressing equity, resources, and inclusivity in education.

In response to the COVID-19 crisis, PACE Executive Director Heather Hough offers an approach involving multiple phases, transitioning from immediate action to re-entry and eventual recovery. The closure of schools due to the pandemic is expected to result in substantial learning loss, especially among disadvantaged students, necessitating a comprehensive assessment of their academic and emotional needs upon their return to school. This crisis has highlighted disparities in distance learning and accentuated existing inequalities, making it imperative to address diverse impacts and support students effectively. To address these challenges, proposing a state-level diagnostic assessment using existing resources like SBAC emerges as a unified and cost-effective means to identify learning gaps and guide resource allocation. The upcoming school term brings uncertainty, demanding clear guidelines, adaptability, and adequate resources for schools to embrace novel learning models. Immediate measures include safeguarding education funding, urging federal support, and targeting assistance for vulnerable students. Additionally, there is an opportunity to overhaul California's funding system to better reflect the critical importance of public education. This commentary is modified from testimony delivered to the California Assembly Budget Committee on April 28, 2020.

PACE Executive Director Heather Hough cautions that COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted California's education system, highlighting the state's low funding and the substantial financial shortfall necessary to meet educational objectives. Recent research indicates a need for an additional $26.5 billion annually in K–12 education to reach state achievement goals. Decades of underinvestment have left districts financially vulnerable, compounded by the economic challenges triggered by the crisis. The dependence on personal earnings for school funding could result in severe cuts, impacting critical student services and potentially leading to layoffs. School closures have underscored their role beyond education, serving as community hubs crucial for student well-being, safety, and essential services. The pandemic exacerbates existing inequalities in learning opportunities among California students. The urgent call is to recognize schools as central to communities and the state's well-being, emphasizing the necessity for significant post-crisis investments in public education as a priority for California's recovery.

COVID-19's closure of California's educational institutions has profoundly impacted learning, equity, and access. Efforts now concentrate on remote learning support, essential non-instructional services, and aiding students with special needs. PACE seeks to bolster these initiatives, gather best practices, and provide real-time research for informed decision-making. Anticipating challenges upon students' return, especially those facing trauma, PACE plans to focus on data collection, student support, system capacity, and resource allocation. This includes addressing learning loss, supporting vulnerable populations, fostering engagement, integrating services across agencies, and seeking adequate funding amid economic strains. PACE intends to employ diverse approaches—reviewing existing research, collecting new data, testing innovations, and analyzing policy options—to aid educators, policymakers, and the public in navigating this crisis and leveraging education for recovery

The 2020 PACE Annual Conference unveiled the latest PACE/USC Rossier Poll results, showcasing California voters' views on key education-related issues. Presenters emphasized the poll's value in understanding voter concerns. Key findings revealed growing pessimism about school quality, a preference for across-the-board teacher salary increases, and concerns about college affordability and fairness in admissions. Voters also stressed addressing gun violence in schools. The panel discussed the state budget, highlighting the need for enhanced higher education accessibility, increased teacher salaries, and a more nuanced approach to education funding. They debated the governor's budget's alignment with voter priorities, noting the need for more support in higher education and teacher salaries and a more effective approach to recruiting teachers.

Researchers conducted an experiment to determine if incentives could improve low-income students' attendance in tutoring programs provided through Supplemental Education Services (SEdS). Three groups of 5th-8th graders were formed: one offered a $100 reward for regular attendance, another receiving certificates of recognition, and a control group without incentives. Surprisingly, the monetary reward didn't increase attendance, while the certificate group attended 40% more sessions than the control. This contrasts with past studies showing monetary incentives for improved test scores as ineffective, suggesting that mere rewards may not enhance skills without additional support. The certificate approach proved cost-effective, costing $9 per student versus $100 for the monetary incentive. However, wider implementation's effectiveness might diminish due to students' varied perceptions of recognition's value, related to existing academic achievements or repeated rewards. The study's success suggests non-monetary incentives are effective and inexpensive. Policymakers and educators seeking to boost student participation in underutilized programs should consider these findings, emphasizing nuanced research into varying incentives' effectiveness and cost-efficiency to motivate student engagement. Despite these promising results, a comprehensive solution requires a deeper understanding of how different incentives affect diverse student populations and their sustained impact over time.

Students often interrupt their college education for various reasons, such as engaging in professional internships or taking voluntary breaks known as gap years or semesters. While past research has extensively explored the positive labor market outcomes of internships, little attention has been paid to their academic effects, or the impact of gap years, on students. In a comprehensive study examining over 100,000 undergraduate students across 463 U.S. institutions, internships emerged as beneficial, enhancing study habits, GPAs, satisfaction with coursework, future educational aspirations, and career ambitions. Conversely, gap years were linked to negative academic consequences, decreasing study habits, GPAs, satisfaction with college experiences, aspirations for further education, and interpersonal skill development, while increasing the preference for part-time employment post-graduation. The study suggests that institutions should promote and expand internship programs to support academic and career growth, while discouraging or providing disincentives for students considering gap years, highlighting the need for students to evaluate the academic implications before taking such breaks.

The persistence of high school dropout rates, especially among low-income and minority students, remains a concern despite recent declines. Targeting student engagement as a key prevention method, studies examine whether in-school arts participation can reduce dropouts. Research based on Texas high school data suggests that students engaged in arts courses face a lower dropout risk. However, caution is necessary as this correlation doesn't confirm causation. Factors like student background and unobserved characteristics may influence both arts participation and dropout behavior. While controlling for various student and school factors reduces dropout risk associated with arts participation, it doe not eliminate it entirely, suggesting a potential causal link. Presently, evidence doesn't explicitly advocate for investing solely in arts education to tackle dropout rates. Yet, it warns against abrupt cuts in arts budgets, stressing the need for a deeper understanding of how robust arts programs engage at-risk students. Despite fiscal pressures leading to cuts in arts education, mounting evidence, including controlled trials, underscores the value of arts in public school curricula, urging policymakers to consider these findings when making decisions.

Education policies often focus on evaluating the effectiveness of interventions without considering their costs. This oversight limits policymakers’ ability to make informed decisions about resource allocation. Understanding intervention costs in relation to their effectiveness is crucial for efficient policymaking. For instance, reducing high school dropout rates, a national priority, could alleviate substantial economic burdens, yet education budgets are limited. Researchers conducted cost-effectiveness analyses on five dropout prevention programs, finding considerable variations in costs and effectiveness. Remedial programs aimed at dropouts were notably more expensive per additional graduate compared to preventative programs, which targeted at-risk students still in school. These findings emphasize the need for cost-effectiveness assessments in educational program evaluations to guide policymaking effectively. Without such analyses, research evidence alone may not provide policymakers with a comprehensive view for decision-making, potentially leading to inefficient resource allocation.

Teacher evaluation, driven by philanthropic support and federal mandates, heavily incorporates classroom observations in most states, where they carry significant weight—contributing to dismissals in 22 states and the District of Columbia. Despite their prevalence, educators disagree on observation protocols, frequency, announcement practices, and assessment tools. Many states opt for standards-based observations, recently endorsed through research like the Measures of Effective Teaching (MET) study, albeit these assessments were primarily designed to gauge instructional standards rather than predict student outcomes, displaying weak correlations with achievement. The concern over these observations lies in their demanding nature, with numerous scoring criteria and estimated costs of $3 billion annually for nationwide implementation. Calls for innovation in observations, aiming for speed and efficacy, sparked validation studies for the Rapid Assessment of Teacher Effectiveness (RATE). In seven experiments, RATE outperformed benchmarks, accurately identifying effective teachers in just 20 minutes of a lesson using a concise rubric after minimal training. It showcased higher reliability and effectiveness compared to instruments reviewed in the MET study, potentially offering cost-effective, efficient evaluations and early support for struggling teachers, benefitting student learning.

Over the last 15 years, federal and California laws have aided older foster care adolescents in completing high school and accessing higher education. Education is crucial for these youths, often lacking family support. Attainment significantly influences stable employment and self-sufficiency. Despite investments, few studies focus on educational impact for foster care teens. Research in three Midwest states showed small differences in employment and earnings between those with no credential and a GED. High school diploma completion offered a substantial advantage, while some college yielded further benefits, and the highest outcomes were seen in college graduates. On average, former foster care youths earned half of their general population counterparts and faced a 22-point employment gap. However, similar education levels narrowed these gaps, with education impacting foster care youths more than their peers. GED completion didn't significantly alter outcomes, emphasizing the importance of high school diplomas. Legislation emphasizing high school completion and college entry aligns with findings. Yet, to ensure sustained support during degree completion, laws might require reevaluation or expanded partnerships. The California Fostering Connections Act extension to 21 might boost college participation, but higher earnings suggest the need for ongoing support through degree completion.

Over decades, rural areas consistently lose younger residents, especially in economically challenged regions offering unstable work. This outmigration leads to imbalanced demographics, with better-educated individuals leaving and those remaining having lower education and incomes. This shift creates uncertainty about education's significance linked to leaving. Retaining youth becomes vital for rural areas. Recent studies suggest schools inadvertently encourage departure by prioritizing high achievers, yet research involving 9,000 rural students counters this. While high-achieving rural students tend to leave, they share strong community ties and similar desires to depart as their peers. Schools aren't actively pushing students away; instead, students' views on local economies shape their aspirations, irrespective of academic status. This emphasizes rural youths' connections and potential retention if opportunities arise. It underscores the need for national/regional policies supporting rural sustainability, addressing the wider lack of opportunities in rural America. It might not merely be local underinvestment but rather a systemic absence of regional/national investment in rural areas.

A new study assessed the effectiveness of after-school tutoring programs, specifically the Supplemental Educational Services (SES) under No Child Left Behind (NCLB), within Chicago Public Schools. Evaluating these SES providers from 2009 onwards, the research aimed to fairly measure their impact on student achievement by considering student characteristics and school settings. The findings indicated that participating in SES positively influenced student achievement, notably with over 40 hours of tutoring, contributing significantly to annual student gains. Interestingly, there was a decline in hourly rates among providers over time, which correlated with the district's program, and a clear link between provider effectiveness and the number of students served. Successful program attributes, such as effective oversight, coordination, and cost reduction, were identified and could be beneficial for other districts. The strategies developed could be adopted by districts to assess provider effectiveness and provide crucial information to parents, aiding informed decisions. This valuable data could guide California districts granted NCLB waivers in program development and accountability system design. Similar analyses are underway in the Los Angeles Unified School District, highlighting the broader potential application of these findings.

In recent years, budget cuts led to increased class sizes across the US. California notably saw a 20% rise, adding over 4 students per class between 2009–2010. This sparks debate on allocating limited resources, with class size at its core due to its impact on educational costs. Studies on class size effects show inconsistent, modest benefits. Although reducing class size incurred substantial costs in the past, raising it could mitigate harm amid budget cuts. California's prior investment in smaller classes yielded limited effects due to swift implementation. Rising class sizes’ impact depends on implementation; layoffs based on teacher effectiveness might counteract negative effects on student achievement. The debate centers on balancing budgets without compromising student learning, especially crucial amid fiscal challenges in education.

In examining the state of gifted and talented education (GATE), the impact of financial strains on these programs in California becomes apparent. During budget constraints, districts often slash funding for GATE, leading to drastic program reductions. Despite the belief that gifted students can excel without additional resources, international assessments, like the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS), reveal American gifted students underperform globally, notably in math and science. This underperformance might stem from the inequitable funding landscape where the average district receives minimal state support ($3.38 per pupil), leaving only a minority with additional funding. Advocating for increased GATE funding seeks to rectify disparities rather than create inequality. The present funding discrepancies result in a form of horizontal inequity, suggesting that access to resources shouldn't hinge on a district's wealth. Encouraging uniform opportunities for gifted students, regardless of district economic status, aligns more with equitable education principles.

The educational landscape in the U.S. features a significant number of English Language Learners (ELLs), yet their funding and educational needs remain understudied. Laws mandate providing resources for ELLs, but research on funding for this group is limited. Costing out studies, used to determine educational costs, lack focus on ELLs, despite their exponential growth. Four primary methodologies assess these costs, but they inconsistently include ELLs. Current research suggests states allocate insufficient funds for K–12 education, and ELLs are not adequately addressed in costing out studies. The literature emphasizes the need for adapted methodologies that account for the complex and diverse needs of ELL students. In California, a hub for ELL education, the discussion around a weighted funding formula prompts consideration of how to incorporate ELL needs. Though there's no definitive funding model for ELLs, existing research offers insights for policymakers, stressing the necessity of considering these students' multifaceted backgrounds and educational requirements. Achieving equity in ELL education necessitates refining costing out methodologies to better understand and cater to their diverse needs. Addressing these complexities is essential to ensure ELLs receive equitable resources for an adequate education.

The California Teachers Association's preliminary assessment of the Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) showed positive outcomes, yet it is a disappointing occasion for two key reasons. Firstly, QEIA's implementation coincided with severe budget cuts in California, limiting its intended significant boost for struggling schools to merely shielding them from the fiscal crisis rather than driving transformative change. Secondly, QEIA's evaluation, designed as a quasi-experiment, lacks the essential randomized assignment of funds, hindering any conclusive understanding of the impact of these resources. The evaluation's ongoing focus on case studies won't offer substantial insight into QEIA's effectiveness, portraying it as a missed chance for impactful educational improvement.

In education polling, people often rate their local schools highly but give lower scores to the overall public school system. This gap in trust between citizens and the broader system poses a significant issue in California due to its vastness and reliance on state resources. Rebuilding trust in the public school system is crucial for garnering necessary political and financial support. PACE’s recent seminar showcased Strategic School Funding for Results (SSFR), a project in districts like Twin Rivers, Pasadena, and Los Angeles Unified. It aims to grant more autonomy over budgets to individual schools while increasing accountability for resource use and student performance. This shift might enhance transparency in fund allocation but doesn’t solve the broader issue. While boosting confidence in local leadership, concerns about resource usage elsewhere in the system persist. California’s real challenge lies in reconnecting schools with their communities beyond merely enhancing resource efficiency.

For nearly three decades, PACE has facilitated discussions on California's education policies by integrating academic research into key policy challenges. Traditionally, this involved publishing policy briefs, organizing seminars, and producing the annual 'Conditions of Education in California' report, offering comprehensive data and analysis on the state's education system. The launch of "Conditions of Education in California" as a blog marks a shift to engage a wider audience and enable ongoing updates. This platform, authored by PACE-affiliated researchers across California, aims to share new data, compelling research findings, and insights on current legislation and policies. The objective remains fostering informed discussions on education policy challenges in California, now extending the conversation to policymakers, educators, and citizens. This inclusive dialogue is crucial to drive the necessary policy understanding and momentum for improving the state's education system.

"Getting Down to Facts" is a new research initiative commissioned by Governor Schwarzenegger's Committee on Education Excellence, state Democratic leaders, and Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Led by Susanna Loeb, a Stanford Graduate School of Education Professor and PACE codirector, this project seeks to explore California's school finance and governance systems. Its objective is to provide comprehensive insights essential for assessing the effectiveness of potential reforms. The initiative addresses three key questions: the current state of school finance and governance, optimizing existing resources for improved student outcomes, and evaluating the need for additional resources to meet educational goals. The studies from this project are expected to be available by January 2007.