The 2021-22 academic year in California was challenging for public education due to eight issues that threaten student learning, schools, and public education itself, including gun violence, declining enrollment, and long-term funding inadequacy. These issues also have a disproportionate impact on marginalized communities and highlight long-standing systemic inequities. In July 2022, PACE and USC Rossier School of Education conducted a poll of California voters to determine their views and priorities on public education.

CA is one of six states that still use average daily attendance (ADA) to allocate state education funding to school districts. A new report suggests that 90% of districts would receive more funding under an enrollment-based formula than under the current ADA-based system, with the biggest boost going to high school districts and those with more low-income, English learner, and foster youth students. However, the report also notes that a new count method alone cannot achieve all goals, and policymakers must consider how to drive positive practices related to student attendance and engagement.

This report examines California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) after eight years and suggests refinements to improve equitable funding, opportunities, and outcomes. Based on interviews, research, and data analysis, the report identifies four areas for improvement: revisiting and refining the funding formula, modernizing funding for students with disabilities, equitably distributing effective teachers, and strengthening transparency, engagement, and accountability. LCFF has been viewed as an improvement over the previous system yet gaps between equity goals and local outcomes remain.

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all students; however, its impact has been particularly devastating for students of color, students from low-income families, English learners, and other marginalized children and youth. As transmission rates decline and vaccination rates increase in California, many are eager to return to normalcy, but we must all recognize that even the prepandemic normal was not working for all students. The 2021–22 school year, therefore, constitutes a critical opportunity for schools to offer students, families, and educators a restorative restart.

A report on the importance of economic analysis in decision-making in CA's school system. Economic evaluations can help identify the most effective policies and interventions while reducing waste and ultimately improving outcomes for students. Studied here is the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) method, its benefits, and its broad applicability. To be more influential, economic analysts should focus on policies and programs that require significant funding, investigate how results are relevant to decision-makers, and consider how resources can be allocated towards cost-effective programs.

California is the wealthiest state in the US, yet its school funding is insufficient to meet educational goals due to the high cost of living. A series of 12 charts provide an explanation of what is happening, with solutions outlined in the final section of an accompanying report.

California schools' funding had improved, but still fell short of what is necessary to meet the state's goals. Now, schools face three major challenges: declines in student achievement and social-emotional well-being due to COVID-19, increased costs associated with distance learning and school reconfiguration, and the need to tighten budgets. Securing necessary funding will require an enormous and sustained effort from many stakeholders to improve schools and student outcomes and strengthen the economic and social outlook for future generations.

In the run-up to 2020 elections, where do California voters stand on key education policy issues? This report examines findings and trends from the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier poll. Key findings include rising pessimism about California education and elected officials, continued concern about gun violence in schools and college affordability, and negative opinions about higher education. However, there is substantial support for increased spending, especially on teacher salaries.

The 2018 Getting Down to Facts II research project drew attention to California’s continued need to focus on the achievement gap, strengthen the capacity of educators in support of continuous improvement, and attend to both the adequacy and stability of funding for schools. Based on the nature of the issues and the progress made in 2019, some clear next steps deserve attention as 2020 unfolds.

This report focuses on estimating the costs for California school districts to meet state-set achievement goals and how these costs differ across districts with different student characteristics. The study uses an econometric cost function approach to estimate base costs and marginal costs associated with poverty, English learners, and special education. The findings are compared with cost studies in other states and used to analyze whether the current school finance system appropriately accounts for cost differentials across districts.

The report explores the impact of teacher sorting, or the tendency for high-achieving students to be assigned to more effective teachers, on student achievement. It finds that teacher sorting has a significant positive effect on student achievement in both math and English language arts. The effects are particularly strong for students who start out low-achieving. The report argues that policies aimed at reducing teacher sorting, such as random assignment of students to teachers, may be counterproductive for student achievement.

The report explores the relationship between teacher experience, school characteristics, and student achievement. Teacher experience is positively associated with student achievement, particularly in schools with high concentrations of low-income students. Additionally, the authors find that school size, teacher turnover, and teacher qualifications also impact student achievement. The report concludes that policies aimed at improving teacher quality and experience can have positive effects on student outcomes, particularly in high-poverty schools.

The report examines the effectiveness of a large-scale performance-based incentive program in California schools. Results show that the program had a small but positive impact on student test scores in math and English, with larger effects in schools with high levels of poverty. However, the authors caution that incentive programs may have unintended consequences and should be implemented with care.

This report discusses the lack of knowledge about the impact of welfare-to-work programs on young children since 1996, and how policy leaders are debating ways to aid jobless mothers and enrich their children's lives. The project team followed 948 mothers and preschool-age children for two to four years after the women entered new welfare programs in California, Connecticut, and Florida.

This report examines how welfare-to-work programs have affected the lives of young children since 1996, and how they've impacted the home and childcare settings in which they are raised. The study followed 948 mothers and preschool-age children in California, Connecticut, and Florida for two to four years, using interviews, assessments, and visits to homes and childcare settings. The report highlights the major findings from the study.

A study conducted for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services aimed to determine the supply and demand of licensed childcare in the county, with a focus on low-income communities and special types of care. The survey analyzed data at three levels: county-wide, service planning areas, and supervisorial districts. Results showed disparities in childcare supply across the county, with shortages in special types of care and little information on where childcare is needed.

Proposition 38 allows parents in California to obtain a state chit worth $4,000 and move their child from public to private school, which would significantly affect school financing. This policy brief addresses six key questions about the proposal, including its differences from the 1993 voucher initiative, which families would benefit, how it would impact school spending and taxpayers, and the success of voucher experiments in raising achievement.