The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) changed California's education policy in 2013 by transferring control of most education dollars to local school districts. It aims to address educational inequities and empower districts to allocate resources to meet students' needs. This brief examines promising practices of three school districts implementing LCFF's equity mission and highlights the new role of county offices of education.

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) allows states to reshape their school accountability systems. One dominant model is the letter-grade system first adopted by Florida, while California is developing a dashboard-style system that encompasses multiple measures such as student attendance and school climate. Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush presents the case for summative ratings, while Heather J. Hough and Michael W. Kirst of PACE stress the importance of multiple measures.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) aims to improve educational equity by providing additional funds to districts with disadvantaged students. Districts are required to engage with their communities and develop Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to identify priorities and allocate funds. However, there are concerns about the quality of LCAPs, lack of stakeholder involvement, and limited transparency. To improve the effectiveness of LCFF, districts must ensure meaningful stakeholder engagement and use data to guide decision-making.

Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE) is a consortium of researchers, policymakers, and practitioners from USC Rossier, Stanford, and UC Davis Schools of Education working to improve education policy in California. PACE's focus has been the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), which changed the state's K-12 budget allocation. The consortium's strength is in its ability to get research into the hands of decision makers, especially in Southern California, where over a quarter of the state's K-12 students reside.

The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) in California and the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) encourage local control in school accountability. The CORE waiver districts have implemented an innovative measurement system and supports for school and district improvement, providing an opportunity to learn from the enactment of a system supported by accountability policy in this new era. This report examines the early implementation and effects of the CORE reform and seeks to inform the ongoing efforts within CORE and future accountability policy in other states and districts.

California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

ESSA allows states to design accountability systems and measures to meet new college and career readiness goals. With the lack of adequate measures, states will need to develop new measures and structures. The CORE Districts in CA, with its innovative accountability system and waivers from No Child Left Behind, is a model for other states. Reports from CORE-PACE highlight the impact of decisions such as subgroup sizes and test score growth on identifying low-performing schools. States can use the district waiver provision to help develop and refine their accountability systems under ESSA.

Policy changes in California create an opportunity to improve education for 1.4 million English learner students. Research suggests improving classification and alignment between services, systematic data collection and improving opportunities in schools. This could benefit large numbers of students without requiring large investments.

California adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in 2010 to provide clear learning standards for math and English from kindergarten to Grade 12. CCSS requires a change in teaching approaches, moving away from memorization and towards problem-solving and evidence-based arguments. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) coincides with CCSS implementation, and local actors must decide on strategies and resource allocation. The state still has key roles to play, but most decisions are made locally in consultation with parents and the community.

This article analyzes recent education policies to explore trends in intergovernmental relations. The authors argue that federal efforts to exert more control have actually strengthened the influence of local actors, creating a bidirectional relationship between federal, state, and local governments. Local actors have retained and asserted significant control over schooling, despite the expanded federal role in education policy. The article concludes with questions for future research and practice.

California cannot afford to ignore or postpone questions of how to support the academic success of English Learners (ELs) in the state’s K-12 education system. Language-minority students already represent more than 40 percent of the state’s K-12 public education students, and their share of enrollment is growing. How well California serves these students will help determine the vitality of the state’s economy and society in the years ahead.

This report commemorates the fifth anniversary of the Getting Down to Facts project, which sought to provide a thorough and reliable analysis of the critical challenges facing California’s education system as the necessary basis for an informed discussion of policy changes aimed at improving the performance of California schools and students. The report focuses on the four key issues that received emphasis in the Getting Down to Facts studies: governance, finance, personnel, and data systems.

Education reform efforts in Los Angeles and the US have failed due to the focus on governance and rules. The solution is to invest in capacity building, creating incentives and agency for students and teachers, easing adoption through regulatory relief, and financing those working on new learning models. The goal is to update the century-old model of learning, called Learning 1.0, with a new model, Learning 2.0, that builds an education system around the learning system. This approach is based on research into unconventional learning models.

This paper examines the impact of pupil mobility in urban districts like Los Angeles, where families are encouraged to switch schools due to the growth of mixed-markets of charter, magnet, and pilot schools. African American and White students are more likely to exit their schools, while overcrowding in low-income Latino neighborhoods leads to higher exit rates. Charter and magnet school students exit less. The district's commitment to relieve overcrowding leads to Latino students moving to newly built schools. The opening of new high schools reduced pupil mobility.

This brief examines the use of student test scores in teacher evaluations in CA. It argues that current evaluation methods are not effective, and that alternative methods of measuring teacher effectiveness, such as peer evaluations and student surveys, should be explored. The brief also discusses the potential consequences of over-reliance on test scores, such as teaching to the test and neglecting non-tested subjects. It concludes that teacher evaluations should be designed to provide useful feedback for professional development, rather than being used solely for accountability purposes.

The call for improved education persists annually within PACE, emphasizing the perpetual need for progress. Even with strides made, the organization does not consider its mission accomplished. Guided by three core principles—allocating resources to disadvantaged schools, granting autonomy to local districts, and rigorous evaluation of educational efficacy—PACE remains dedicated to fostering lasting policy reform and enhanced educational performance across California's system. Leveraging experience from Michigan State's Education Policy Center, PACE's leadership continues to drive the...

Getting Down to Facts is an extensive investigation of CA's public education system commissioned by a bipartisan group of CA leaders. The project aimed to describe California's school finance and governance systems, identify obstacles hindering resource utilization, and estimate costs to achieve student outcome goals. The project resulted in 23 reports by scholars, which highlight that the current school finance and governance systems fail to help students achieve state performance goals, particularly those from low-income families. The reports provide a framework for assessing reform options.

PACE is bringing back its publication, Conditions of Education in California, to keep the focus on the long-term education reforms required by California. Six policy scholars have contributed to this edition, providing baseline data on school performance and recommendations for policy changes to support long-term improvement. PACE plans to continue regular publication of this report to track progress towards a more effective educational system in California.

California faces significant challenges in closing the achievement gap between different student groups, including wide disparities based on race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. While progress has been made, the gaps persist. This report summarizes what is being learned from state initiatives to reduce these disparities, addresses obstacles limiting effectiveness, and provides options for policymakers to address this urgent issue.

This report analyzes the effects of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on student performance using three barometers: the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), state data, and fourth-grade test scores. The authors find that earlier test score growth has largely faded since NCLB's enactment in 2002, and progress made in narrowing achievement gaps in the 1990s has largely disappeared in the post-NCLB era. The report suggests that policymakers need to reconsider the efficacy of NCLB and consider alternative approaches to school reform.

This report discusses key education policy challenges in California, including funding, teacher quality, achievement gaps, and school accountability. The report highlights the need for equitable funding and effective teacher training and retention programs to address these issues. It also emphasizes the importance of holding schools accountable for student achievement and providing targeted support to struggling schools. The report concludes by calling for sustained attention to these critical education issues to ensure that all California students have access to a high-quality education.

This policy brief provides an overview of California's existing network of preschool centers and the potential impact of Proposition 82, which would provide funding for half-day preschool programs for 70% of the state's four-year-olds. PACE, an independent research center, aims to clarify evidence informing education policy options. A 2005 PACE review focused on enrollment patterns and policy options for improving access and quality of local preschools.

This working paper analyzes the impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on the state's funding system and notes that it exacerbated inequities by penalizing schools that did not meet annual progress targets without providing sufficient resources to help them improve. The authors suggest that a more equitable funding system based on student needs and costs would better serve all students, including those who are struggling to meet academic standards.

The Teaching and California's Future initiative provides policymakers with data on the teacher workforce and labor market. The initiative's annual report details teacher development policies and their impact on teacher quality and distribution. The goal is to help policymakers make informed decisions about strengthening the state's teacher workforce.

The quality of teaching and the need to expand California's ranks of excellent teachers demand urgent public discussion. We must attract the best and brightest to teaching, prepare them effectively, and support and retain them. Solutions require bipartisan leadership, not spin. This report presents the latest research and projections, highlighting that while some numbers are improving, we're likely to face severe shortages again soon and the pipeline for recruiting, preparing, and training teachers has substantial problems.