This paper examines how the growth of charter schools affects traditional public schools' financial health in California. The study finds that higher charter enrollment is associated with lower per-pupil spending and fiscal health in traditional public schools, but the effects are smaller than in other states. However, the proportion of expenditures allocated to different activities, goods, or services does not differ. The paper provides lessons for policymakers and suggests that California's economic and policy context may explain the differences from similar analyses in other states.

Governor Newsom’s first Budget Proposal increases funding for education in California. There are areas of substantive overlap in the Budget Proposal and research findings from the Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) research project, released in September 2018, which built an evidence base on the current status of California education and implications for paths forward. As the Budget moves from proposal to reality, it is critical that the evidence from GDTFII continues to inform the policy process.

With a new governor, state superintendent and legislators in Sacramento and a diminished federal role in education, there is an opportunity for California’s leaders to take stock of recent educational reforms and make necessary improvements. There are also a host of new and looming issues in K-12 and higher education. As California’s leaders confront these and other issues, where do California voters, including parents, stand on education and education policy? The newest edition of the USC Rossier/PACE Poll shares voter perspectives on a wide range of education issues.

This article uses case studies to explore how district administrators' conceptions of equity relate to finance reform implementation. The authors identify two conceptions of equity: greater resources for students with greater needs, and equal distribution of resources for all students. These beliefs were reflected in resource allocation decisions and were informed by districts' student demographics, organizational identities, and perceptions of adequacy.

California's Local Control Funding Formula highlights low performance of special education students. Many districts allocate more base funding for all students into special education. A study found state funding growth has not kept pace with district costs, and the current formula inadequately funds preschool programs for infants and toddlers with disabilities. The study suggests better alignment between special education and the LCFF, and improved governance and accountability structures.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) has increased per-pupil revenues, especially for low-income districts, and provided more flexibility in expenditures, leading to improvements in student outcomes. The funding was distributed based on the proportion of disadvantaged students, and expenditure increases were primarily allocated to teachers, pensions, and special education. The policy was implemented during a time of increased K-12 funding after the Great Recession and existing revenue distribution patterns.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) shifts control of education dollars to local districts, enhancing resource allocation practices. However, inadequate base funds may constrain progress. Stakeholder engagement is evolving yet remains challenging, and school board involvement is typically modest. LCFF communication and accountability mechanisms receive mixed reviews. County offices of education have expanded their role but will need to increase their capacity. Public awareness of the LCFF lags, but it enjoys substantial support.

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.

American schools have long suffered from inequitable distribution of funding, resources, and effective teachers. The LCFF reform in California is a promising solution to address achievement gaps for high-need students, but successful implementation is critical. Research has found that stakeholder engagement, explicit equity frameworks, and evidence-based programs are crucial to ensure positive impact. Studies have also revealed challenges such as underspending funds and insufficient stakeholder engagement, highlighting the need for continuous improvement.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) replaced categorical funding for schools in California in 2013, providing flexibility, targeted student funding, and local accountability. Two years in, research shows optimism and concern. The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) faces challenges, stakeholders need more engagement, and implementation requires capacity and overcoming the emerging teacher shortage. Public awareness of LCFF lags at 65%.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) represents a major shift in the state's education system by empowering school districts to allocate funding based on the needs of their students, with added funds for disadvantaged students. The LCFF eliminates categorical funding streams and promotes local democracy by requiring stakeholder engagement. The implementation of the LCFF is still in its early stages, and this study examines how school districts are using their newfound budget flexibility and engaging stakeholders, as well as identifying opportunities and challenges.

The passage describes the implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) in California, which is expected to bring new revenues to school districts. The report suggests that strategic decision-making and goal-setting based on research-based strategies are crucial to realizing the potential benefits of the LCFF. Recommendations include an investment in four key areas that can produce real gains in school and student performance.

The LAUSD invested over $19B to build 130 new facilities to relieve overcrowded schools. A PACE policy brief analyzed its effects on student achievement and found robust gains for many elementary-school pupils who switched from old to new facilities. However, significant gains were limited to elementary school students and new high school facilities produced weak and inconsistent achievement gains. The report also tracked thousands of students who moved from overcrowded to new facilities over the 2002-2008 period.

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.

This report explores how 10 California school districts responded to the deregulation of $4.5 billion in education funding, which became entirely flexible in 2009. The study investigates how district leaders made budget decisions and what local factors influenced their responses. The research was conducted by a team of scholars from the RAND Corporation, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and San Diego State University.

This report discusses the effects of California's partial release of categorical funds to local school boards in 2009. The increased flexibility has provided an opportunity to observe how districts respond to the policy change, but the impact is difficult to isolate as most districts have been struggling to maintain core services during a severe budget crisis. The report includes preliminary results from an ongoing study of district responses to the increased categorical flexibility.

This working paper examines the use of Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) funds, which allocated $2.6B over seven years to California's lowest-performing schools. The authors conducted a study of four Los Angeles high schools to investigate how QEIA dollars were spent in the first year, who made the decisions, and how funds were used to improve teaching and the instructional program. The study found that district officials and principals had discretion in allocating funds, consistent with recent efforts to deregulate categorical-aid programs and give local educators fiscal discretion.

This article explores the reasons why education has become a central focus of modern societies and the largest public expenditure around the world. The state has built and expanded national education systems, made attending school mandatory, and linked adult success to academic performance. The article delves into the economic factors behind state financing and provision of schools.

The Californians will vote on Proposition 174 which will amend the state constitution to establish "scholarships" for kindergarten to 12th-grade schooling. These new schools will be publicly funded but may have privately selected governing boards and religious orientation. It is unclear whether they will be public or private schools. The paper attempts to reduce uncertainty regarding the financial consequences of the proposed voucher plan and address questions about public costs and possible cost savings.

PACE has analyzed the financial, legal, and social ramifications of Proposition 174, the school choice initiative, so as to provide Californians and policymakers with accurate, unbiased information. This packet contains important questions and answers about the initiative, summaries of PACE's financial analysis and polling report, and background information on PACE and its directors.

The "Parental Choice in Education Initiative" or Proposition 174, will be voted on by Californians on November 2, 1993. PACE has conducted an analysis of the initiative's provisions to provide objective information to policymakers, parents, educators, and the public. PACE is not taking a stance on the initiative but has produced additional materials related to the initiative and the issue of school choice. These materials are listed in the attached report on school choice.

School finance has become a prominent issue again due to court decisions and litigation in several states. This article explores school finance changes in the 70s and 80s and outlines key issues for the 90s, including the relationship between finance and education goals, site-based management, teacher pay, accountability, school choice, and nontraditional issues such as preschool and non-educational services for children.

Debate over school choice has been reignited due to the school reform movement and frustration with low academic achievement. The conversation becomes heated when private schools are included in the system of choice, as proponents believe it will foster competition and improve schools, while opponents argue it will harm public schools and society. This article aims to shed light on the complex issue of school choice.

The new global economy is reshaping education worldwide, necessitating policies that expand access and enhance quality. Despite different educational systems, similar issues need to be addressed, resulting in an international convergence of education policies. The article discusses the emerging economy, educational challenges, policy alternatives, and compares recent reforms in the US and UK.