Civic Engagement in Education: Insights from California's Local Control Funding Formula

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 761-774
Author(s):  
Julie A. Marsh ◽  
Tasminda K. Dhaliwal ◽  
Michelle Hall ◽  
Morgan S. Polikoff
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Education Policies ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
The Public ◽  
Target Populations ◽  
State Education ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula

In this policy brief, we use the case of California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) to provide policy makers and educators guidance on how to involve the public in goal setting and resource distribution decisions. We provide clarity around who is and is not participating, why, and what broader lessons we can draw for implementing federal and state education policies mandating public engagement. Our findings indicate tremendous room for improvement. LCFF's target populations (e.g., low-income, English learners) are not more likely to be aware of or participate in decisions than nontargeted groups, which suggests weak accountability for the use of public funds by the policy's target populations. Although LCFF has defined a broad set of stakeholders, only a narrow segment of the public (i.e., individuals with stronger ties to and positive views of schools) is aware of and engaging with the policy. Finally, we find a substantial gap between actual participation in LCFF and interest in participation, which may relate to a lack of self-efficacy, time, trust, perceived appropriateness, and information. As states and districts respond to mandates for engagement, these results suggest the need for greater investments in: (1) communication, (2) targeting a range of stakeholders, and (3) capacity building.

Does Your Local Control Accountability (LCAP) Plan Deliver on the Promise of Increased or Improved Services for English Learners? 10 Research Aligned Rubrics to Help Answer the Question and Guide Your Program

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
School Finance ◽  
English Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
First Year ◽  
District Leaders ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
New School ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula

As California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) came into effect in 2013, districts were given more flexibility to use state resources and create a new school finance system to improve/increase services for students with greater needs for support, including English Learners (ELs), students from low-income backgrounds, and foster youth. Local Education Agencies (LEAs) were tasked with preparing the Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to describe how districts use their plans to meet their annual goals for all students. To aid LEAs in their design and implementation of programs to address the needs of ELs, Californians Together, the California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE), California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), and the Center for Equity for English Learners (CEEL) collaboratively developed the rubrics with 10 focus areas that have a high impact on ELs. These areas include: (1) English Language Development, (2) Parent Engagement, (3) Professional Development, (4) Programs and Course Access, (5) Expenditures, (6) District Wide Use of Concentration and Supplemental Grant Funds, (7) School Wide Use of Concentration and Supplemental Grant Funds, (8) Actions and Services, (9) Proportionality, and (10) English Learner Data to Inform Goals. These 10 rubrics and their corresponding indicators are based on research-based principles and practices for English Learners. These rubrics were first employed in the review of first-year LCAPs by the above-mentioned organizations and remain an important analytical instrument for district leaders to gain insights into the planning for and improving programs and services for ELs.

scholarly journals Masking the Focus on English Learners: The Consequences of California’s Accountability System Dashboard Results on Year 4 Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magaly Lavadenz
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
School Finance ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Great Promise ◽  
California Department ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Accountability System ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
Policy Mechanisms

California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), signed into law in 2013, centers equity as a key to increased and improved services for three targeted student subgroups, including English Learners (ELs), low-income students, and foster youth. As a component of LCFF, districts develop Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to specify their goals and strategies for using LCFF funds for equity and continuous improvement purposes. The California Model Five by Five Grid Placement Report (Spring 2017 Dashboard) included the Five by Five Placement Grid, a key function of which is to identify the needs of diverse ELs. The Dashboard and the LCAPs are two policy mechanisms with great promise in combining school finance and accountability reform to promote equity and coherent state-wide. In this report, Lavadenz and colleagues review the EL policy context and examine the connection between the two contemporary policy mechanisms in California, namely the Year 4 LCAP and the California Department of Education’s Accountability Model (Spring 2017 Dashboard). The authors use a sample of 26 California school districts with high numbers/percentages of ELs and conclude that California’s current accountability system diminishes the urgency to respond to educational needs of the English Learner subgroup and undermines the equity intent of the LCFF. Few promising practices and assets-based approaches were identified in the LCAPs, and there is minimal mention of metrics focused on EL outcomes. The authors provide recommendations at state, county office of education and district levels.

scholarly journals Coign of vantage and action: Considering California’ local accountability and school finance plans for English learners

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julian Vasquez Heilig ◽  
Lisa S. Romero ◽  
Megan Hopkins
Keyword(s):  
School Districts ◽  
Local Control ◽  
School Finance ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Educational Equity ◽  
Public Schooling ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula

Local control has been a bedrock principle of public schooling in America since its inception. In 2013, the California Legislature codified a new local accountability approach for school finance. An important component of the new California Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) approach is a focus on English learners (ELs). The law mandates that every school district produce a Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) to engage the local community in defining outcomes and determining funding for ELs. Based on an exploratory analysis of a representative sample of LCAPs, we show that, although California’s new approach offered an opportunity to support locally-defined priorities and alternatives to top-down accountability, few if any districts had yet took full advantage of the opportunity. That is, the school districts in our sample had not yet engaged with the local community to facilitate significant changes to accountability or redistribution of funding and resources to support educational equity for ELs.

scholarly journals Does the Measurement Matter? Assessing Alternate Approaches to Measuring State School Finance Equity for California’s Local Control Funding Formula

AERA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 233285841987742
Author(s):  
David S. Knight ◽  
Jesús Mendoza
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
School Finance ◽  
District Level ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
State School ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Finance Equity ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
Funding Level

Scholars have not reached consensus on the best approach to measure state school finance equity. The regression-based approach estimates the relationship between district poverty rate and funding level, controlling for other district cost factors. A second commonly used approach involves estimating the weighted average funding level for low-income students or other subgroups. Meanwhile, policymakers have preferences for their own data systems and poverty indicators when reading reports and assessing progress. We constructed parallel, district-level panel data sets using data from the California Department of Education and the U.S. Census. We estimated changes over time in district-level school finance equity under California’s Local Control Funding Formula, using multiple school finance measurement approaches, with each of the two data sets. Our results show that different methods and analytic choices result in policy-relevant differences in findings. We discuss the implications for policy and future research.

scholarly journals A preliminary analysis of California’s New Local Control Funding Formula

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Wolf ◽  
Janelle Sands
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
First Year ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Early Implementation ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
K 12 ◽  
Public Education Finance

California recently overhauled its K–12 public education finance system. Enacted in 2013, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) replaced California’s 40-year-old funding formula. The LCFF increases district officials’ fiscal flexibility; provides more resources to districts serving larger proportions of low-income, English learner (EL), and foster youth students; and requires district officials to engage community members in district decisions. This article expands on a study conducted by a team of 12 independent researchers that investigated the early implementation of the LCFF. The study sought to answer three research questions: (a) how are district officials using their newfound budget flexibility? (b) how are district officials engaging parents and other stakeholders? (c) what are the opportunities provided to districts under the LCFF and the challenges it creates for them? Data include 71 semi-structured interviews with district stakeholders across 10 diverse districts in California and 22 interviews with county office of education (COE) officials across the state. Findings include that respondents were cautiously optimistic about the LCFF. District officials appreciated increased budget flexibility and the focus on community engagement. Inevitably, however, district and COE officials experienced challenges in implementing the law during its first year. 

scholarly journals Falling Short on The Promise to English Learners: A Report on Year One LCAPs

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elvira Armas ◽  
Magaly Lavadenz ◽  
Laurie Olsen
Keyword(s):  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Local Control ◽  
English Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
State Level ◽  
Student Outcome ◽  
English Learner ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
One Year

California’s Local Control Funding Formula was signed into law in California in 2013 and allowed districts the flexibility to meet their student needs in locally appropriate manners. One year after its implementation, a panel of 26 reviewers, including educators, English Learner (EL) advocates, and legal services staff reviewed the Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to understand how districts employ this flexibility to address the needs of ELs. The report uses the English Learner Research-Aligned LCAP Rubrics with 10 focus areas, and reviews sample LCAPs from 29 districts, including districts with the highest numbers/percentages of English Learners in the state, districts representative of California’s geographic Regions, and districts providing quality EL services. The review centers around four questions of the extent to which first-year LCAPs: (1) specify goals and identify outcomes for ELs, (2) identify action steps and allocate funds for increased or improved services for all types of ELs, (3) reflect research-based practices for achieving language proficiency and academic achievement for English Learners in their actions, programs and services, and (4) are designed and implemented with EL parent input as reflected in stakeholder engagement. The results indicate that overall, the LCAP is inadequate as part of the state’s public accountability system in ensuring equity and access for ELs. Six key findings were: (1) difficulty in discerning funding allocations related to EL services and programs; (2) inability to identify districts’ plans for increased services for ELs; (3) lack of explicitly specified services and programs aligned to EL needs; (4) weak approach or missing English Language Development (ELD) or implementation of ELD standards in most LCAPs; (5) weak/inconsistent representation of EL parent engagement; and (6) lack of EL student outcome measures. The authors also present detailed findings for each focus topic and offer district and state level recommendations.

Equity for English Learners: Evidence from Four Years of California’s Local Control Funding Formula

2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-192
Author(s):  
Magaly Lavadenz ◽  
Elvira G. Armas ◽  
Marco A. Murillo ◽  
Sylvia Jáuregui Hodge
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula

scholarly journals District Administrators' Perspectives on the Impact of The Local Control Funding Formula on English Learners

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magaly Lavadenz ◽  
Gisela O’Brien
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Learning Goals ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Funding Formula ◽  
District Administrators ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
District Administrator ◽  
The Impact

Two years into implementation, this policy brief examines how California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and its accompanying Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) meet the needs of English Learners (ELs). Researchers seek to understand district administrator perspectives on the impact of LCFF for ELs through interviews and focus groups with administrators that represent districts from Northern, Central, and Southern California. Findings reveal that although the LCAP serves as a mechanism to increase personnel and PD efforts to address EL needs, it is still largely viewed as a compliance document that requires alignment with other strategic documents and is sensitive to changes in leadership. The following policy recommendations are made as a result of these findings: 1) re-design the LCAP to support districts in specifying EL learning goals, services, assessments and expected outcomes; 2) differentiate support for district administrators; and 3) invest (long-term) in district-level and site-level professional development with a focus on EL success.

scholarly journals A review of year 2 LCAPs: A weak response to English Learners

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Olsen ◽  
Elvira Armas ◽  
Magaly Lavadenz
Keyword(s):  
Local Control ◽  
English Learners ◽  
English Language ◽  
The State ◽  
Teacher Capacity ◽  
Weak Response ◽  
Local Control Funding Formula ◽  
Second Year ◽  
County Offices Of Education ◽  
Services And Supports

A panel of 32 reviewers analyzed the Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAPs) of same sample of 29 districts for the second year of implementation of the 2013 California Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Using the same four questions as the Year 1 report, the Year 2 analysis also addresses the key differences between first and second-year LCAPs. Key findings from the Year 2 LCAPs review include: (1) similarly weak responses to the needs of ELs by LEAs in Year 2; (2) some improvement in clarity about services provided to ELs in some areas, though most evidence was weak; (3) minimal attention to the new English Language Development Standards; (4) minimal investment in teacher capacity building to address EL needs; (5) lack of attention to coherent programs, services and supports for ELs and failure to address issues of program and curriculum access; (6) weak engagement of ELs’ parents in LCAP process and content of LCAP plans; (7) poor employment of EL data to inform LCAP goals and weak use of EL indicators as an LCAP accountability component; (8) lack of specificity in describing district services and site allocations for supplemental and concentration funding; and (9) difficulty identifying the coherence of responses of EL needs in year 2 LCAPs. Overall, the analysis of the 29 LCAPs continue to signal a weak response to EL needs. The authors reassert the urgency of the recommendations in the Year 1 report, offer additional specific recommendations for the state, county offices of education, and districts, and call upon the state to reaffirm the equity commitment in the LCFF design.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document