Published in the Jan. 8, 2014 issue of Morgan Hill Life
District to have more say over how money is spent
By Steve Betando
Last summer, Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law a new system for funding public education that should make it easier for public school districts to allocate funds. The 2013–2014 Budget Act created the Local Control Funding Formula. This new formula eliminates revenue limits and most state categorical programs for allocation. Schools now receive funding based on the demographic profile of the students they serve.
Steve Betando
Until this school year, revenues sent to the schools were based on an antiquated formula created in the early 1970s. Since the creation of the 40-year-old revenue limit formula, Californians have complained of the inequities and lack of appropriate funding for our state’s public schools. Schools also suffered from funding restrictions which forced districts into developing budgets based on regulations rather than local needs.
When programs were legislated or funds were shifted for specific purposes, designated money could not be switched from category to category by a district or school. In many instances, unused money was returned to the issuing agency rather than put toward locally identified alternate needs. With LCFF, the inequities found between districts are designed to be eliminated over time. And local school communities, not the legislature, will now determine how the funds can best be used to improve outcomes of students. The law permits greater flexibility of use by the elimination of most of the categorical programs. Until full implementation, however, local educational agencies will receive roughly the same amount of funding they received in 2012–2013.
California ranks 48 out of 50 states in per pupil spending. For 2014 and beyond, the LCFF design proposes an additional amount each year to bridge the gap between current funding levels and the new LCFF target levels. The budget projects the time frame for full implementation of the LCFF to be eight years.
As part of the LCFF, school districts, county offices and charter schools are required to develop, adopt and annually update a three-year Local Control and Accountability Plan beginning July 1, 2014. Morgan Hill started the LCAP process by reaching out to the community for input on programs. The school board recently adopted the district’s Mission, Vision and Values.
The LCAP provides more transparency in school budgeting and offers community members an opportunity to help shape budgets, establish goals and prioritize strategies to achieve them.
Morgan Hill is a leading district for the implementation of the State’s new plan. We look forward to having all members of south San Jose, Morgan Hill and San Martin join in creating a model program to maximize the use of funds for our students’ benefit.
In the past two years, the State’s economic recovery brought new hope and cries for replenishing the State’s educational investment in our children and the need for local authority on use of this investment. It wasn’t until this past summer that the state legislature adequately responded to the cries of local communities.
Steve Betando is the interim superintendent for Morgan Hill Unified School District.
Priorities in the new law
• Basic Services — Appropriate teacher assignment, sufficient instructional materials and facilities in good repair.
• Common Core State Standards — Implementation of the academic content and performance standards adopted by the State Board of Education, including how the programs and services will enable English learners to access the common core academic content standards and the English Language Development standards.
• Parent Involvement — Efforts the school district makes to seek parent input, including how the district will promote parental participation in programs for economically disadvantaged pupils, English learners, foster youth and individuals with exceptional needs.
• Pupil Achievement — Measured by multiple indicators including, but not limited to, assessment data, college readiness and language proficiency.
• Pupil Engagement — Measured by multiple indicators including, but not limited to, rates associated with attendance, chronic absenteeism, dropout (middle and high school) and high school graduation.
• School Climate — Measured by multiple indicators including, but not limited to, pupil suspension and expulsion rates as well as other local measures assessing safety and school connectedness.
• Course Access — The extent to which pupils have access to, and are enrolled in, a broad course of study that includes core subject areas, including the programs and services developed and provided to economically disadvantaged pupils, English learners, foster youth, and individuals with exceptional needs.
• Student Outcomes — Other indicators of student performance in specific areas.
