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.

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.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) provides base funding and grants for low-income students, English learners, and foster youth, and allows local school systems to allocate resources as they see fit. The LCFFRC conducted a survey of 350 California superintendents to understand their experiences with and views of the law. Results inform policymakers and indicate areas where changes may be needed. The survey sample included districts of varying sizes and proportions of unduplicated students.

This article examines the democratic participation in the first-year implementation of California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) by analyzing data from 10 districts. It finds that power imbalances, institutional habits, and limited capacity constrain stakeholder involvement, while trust, support, and homogeneity foster deeper democratic engagement. The article concludes with implications for policy, practice, and future research.

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.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) gives districts funding authority and requires input from stakeholders to create Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) for equitable resource allocation and improved student outcomes. This report explores stakeholder engagement, implementation challenges, resource allocation, and equity using eight case studies. Despite limitations, this study offers valuable insights into California's K-12 education system's finance and governance.

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.

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.

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%.

The gap between researchers and policy makers is a significant issue. Both sides agree that the current state of affairs is unsatisfactory, but fundamental differences between their orientations and interests inevitably lead to disagreements about which questions merit study and which answers merit attention. The gap finds its origins in intrinsic dilemmas of policy research, making it wide and apparently unbridgeable.

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.

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.

Effective professional development is essential for achieving ambitious student achievement goals in standards-based education reforms. While research has identified key features of effective programs, many districts still offer unfocused and ineffective professional development that wastes limited resources. To deploy effective strategies, districts must first know how much they cost. This article aims to develop an analytical framework for organizing professional development costs and providing a common language for discussing programs.

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 growing demand for compensatory education and for child care has generated a rash of federal legislation; many states have enacted new early childhood programs, most of them located within schooling systems, and many others are considering their options. This article examines the basic policy issues governments confront in early childhood education, including the content of programs, their financing, and the inevitable trade-off between cost and quality. The final section of the article outlines the available policy options.

An inventory of 30 California districts reveals their policy stance on teacher professional development, which primarily consists of skill acquisition through district-led programs. Other sources, such as universities or professional communities, are less visible. The districts are the dominant providers of development opportunities, with expenditures reflecting a ready marketplace of predetermined programs. Alternative routes to professional growth are less evident.

The notion that larger school districts are superior has changed, with some researchers advocating for smaller ones. Recent reform reports have focused on the school site as the decision-making seat. Three main issues guide district size research: fiscal efficiency, school effectiveness, and community identity. Although research has been conducted, there is still no definitive answer. This article explores the research and debate on the "right" size for school districts and identifies unanswered questions, hoping to kindle interest in further research.

1983 marked the beginning of state education reform with the release of the Nation at Risk report. Although many states had already passed education legislation, the last states joined in 1987. The reform's diffusion and breadth is impressive, and its consistency in concept makes it a hallmark in state policymaking. With initial statutes based on the 1983 concepts completed, the question remains whether a second wave will occur or if momentum has been spent.

This article examines whether state-level initiatives for school reform can improve local schools. California's comprehensive reform legislation, SB 813, aimed to alter curriculum and instruction in almost every school in the state. The effects of such a broad range of reforms on local districts and schools are not well understood. While earlier studies indicate that the reforms were being implemented, questions remain about how they operate in local schools and whether they result in substantive change. The answers to these questions are crucial for policymakers and practitioners alike.

Michael Kirst, professor at Stanford University and former president of the California State Board of Education, is interviewed by People in Education Evaluation and Research (PEER). Kirst co-directs the Policy Analysis for California Education (PACE) project, an independent education policy center that provides unbiased research to legislators and policy makers. With Kirst's extensive experience in education and government, he is uniquely qualified to understand multiple sides of educational issues.

The passage of Proposition 13 in 1978 sent shockwaves through California's community colleges, affecting all aspects of their operations. The crisis exposed the colleges' lack of preparedness for such magnitude, leaving them grappling to cope with chaos. This article looks at California's experience and highlights critical elements necessary for recognizing problems and mitigating chaos. Educational leadership will need to be adept at ambiguity and conflict resolution as the future promises to be more complex and unpredictable. Finance, mission, and governance are the three key areas of focus.

PACE, a university-based research center, provides "nonpartisan, objective, independent" information on K-12 schooling in CA. Its analyses have been invaluable to lawmakers and educators during the state's active education-reform period. PACE has played a growing role in debates on school issues, exemplified by a heated debate in the CA legislature over the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. PACE offers a model for providing data for education policies when many states are seeking broader information bases. It has helped provide a better understanding of what is happening in education.

Educational reform in the US has shifted from equal opportunities to greater school productivity. There are some positive results with increased enrolment in academic courses, rigorous textbooks, and raised admission standards for higher education. However, fundamental components of the reform are at odds with the dynamics of organizational revitalization. Without policies that unleash productive local initiatives, the reform is likely to lose momentum, eroding citizens' confidence in schools and generating public resources for them.