TOPIC

Education finance

Education Finance

In adopting the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), California moved from one of the least transparent school funding systems in the country to one of the most straightforward. In addition, increased revenue has helped California school district resource and expenditure levels not only recover from their post-recession lows, but also reach higher levels in 2016–17 than at any point since at least 2004–05.

However, per-pupil spending in California remains consistently below the national average, and district budgets are being impacted by rising costs associated with pensions, health care, Special Education, and facilities.

PACE research in this area is focused on building and advancing the evidence base on how to achieve equitable and adequate funding that leads to improved outcomes.

Recent Topic Publications
GDTFII Brief Pension
The California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) has amassed a $107 billion "debt" due to the accrual of pension liabilities. CalSTRS contributions are legislated to nearly double by 2021. The higher rates are required through 2046,…
GDTFII Brief Adequacy
California’s Current Policies and Funding Levels
California's education system aims to provide all public school students with a broad course of study consistent with state standards. However, many educators feel that the state's funding system does not provide adequate resources to meet these…
GDTFII Brief Special Ed
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…
GDTFII Brief Effects
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…