BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 886
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing: April 4, 2001

                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                            Virginia Strom-Martin, Chair
                 AB 886 (Daucher) - As Introduced:  February 22, 2001
           
          SUBJECT  : Academic Performance Index: incentive program. 

           SUMMARY  : Establishes an incentive program for school districts  
          maintaining grade 7 or 8, who exceed their API growth target by  
          50% every year.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Establishes that a school district maintaining grade 7 or  
            grade 8, or both, may elect to participate in this incentive  
            program.

          2)Establishes that a school district that chooses to participate  
            in this program must exceed its annual API growth target by  
            50% every year that it participates in the program.

          3)Establishes that a school district that exceeds its annual API  
            growth target by 50% will receive the statewide average base  
            revenue limit per unit of average daily attendance for high  
            school districts as long as it continues to participate in the  
            incentive program.

          4)Establishes that if a school district that fails to exceed its  
            annual API growth target by 50% will not participate in the  
            program in the next school year and will not receive the  
            incentive funding, but can choose to participate in the  
            following year.

           EXISTING LAW  establishes the Public Schools Accountability Act  
          (PSAA) of 1999, which created the API, to measure the academic  
          performance of schools of all pupils and demonstrate comparable  
          academic achievement by all pupils, including numerically  
          significant ethnic and socioeconomic disadvantaged subgroups  
          within schools.  The API is designed to consist of a variety of  
          indicators reported by the SDE, including, but not limited to  
          the Standardized Testing And Reporting Program (STAR).   
          Furthermore, the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) and  
          the State Board of Education (SBE) are required to establish  
          growth targets for schools and a statewide API performance  
          target.      









                                                                  AB 886
                                                                  Page  2

           FISCAL EFFECT  : Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   

           Background  : According to the State Department of Education  
          (SDE), In 1999, schools received API growth targets for the  
          school year. A school's growth target is the amount of  
          improvement a school is expected to make in its API score in a  
          year. In 2000, schools received the report of actual growth  
          achieved in the previous school year. Generally, if a school  
          meets or exceeds its target it will be eligible to receive an  
          award, and if the school does not it may be eligible for an  
          interventions program. The minimum school percentage growth  
          target is five percent annually. Commencing with the 2000-01  
          school year, an October to August reporting cycle will take  
          place annually. API scores, rankings, and growth targets for the  
          upcoming school year will be disseminated in October, and actual  
          growth for that year will be reported the following August.

          The API will also be used to determine comparable improvement in  
          academic achievement by all numerically significant ethnic and  
          socioeconomically disadvantaged subgroups of students within  
          schools.  Furthermore, according to SDE, in 2000, 71% schools  
          met their growth target of the 7,200 eligible.  

           What is the need for the bill  ? The author's office did not  
          provide the committee any information to substantiate the need  
          for this bill after repeated requests.  

          Furthermore, the Legislature and the Governor have created a  
          substantial awards program for schools who do meet their growth  
          targets.  According to SDE, if a school meets participation and  
          API growth criteria, it may be eligible to receive monetary  
          awards through the Governor's Performance Award, which has $227  
          million appropriated for it.  The School Site Employee  
          Performance Bonus, which has $350 million allocated for it and  
          the Certificated Staff Performance Incentive programs, which has  
          a total of $100 million for the 5 lowest decile schools.  If a  
          school does not meet or exceed its growth targets, it may be  
          identified for participation in the Immediate  
          Intervention/Underperforming Schools Program (II/USP), which was  
          given a $25.6 million augmentation in the 2000-01 Budget. 

           Clarification  : The API is based on schools, not school districts  
          as referred to in the bill.  School districts are not given an  








                                                                  AB 886
                                                                  Page  3

          API score, schools are.  Therefore, individual schools would  
          have to be eligible for the program not school districts.   Staff  
          recommends  changing all references of school district to  
          schools.    

           Why should not all schools be eligible for this program  ?   
          Assuming that the author means schools and not school districts  
          (i.e., since school districts do not receive an API score),  
          according to the California Basic Educational Data System  
          (CBEDS), under this bill, 4,690 elementary schools and 863 high  
          schools  will not  be eligible for this program.  Many of these  
          schools are low performing and need additional resources and  
          help just as those schools who have 7th and/or 8th grades.  The  
          committee may wish to discuss this issue further.  

           Does this bill create a system of inequity  ?  Under this  
          legislation, a high performing school, who exceeds its growth  
          rate by 50%, would receive additional funding just as a low  
          performing school would.  For example, a school with an API  
          score of 9 that exceeds its growth rate by 50% and a school with  
          an API score of 3 that exceeds its growth rate by 50% would both  
          be eligible for a revenue increase.  Why should we significantly  
          reward schools who are already doing well, when there are so  
          many low-performing schools that need additional resources and  
          assistance so they can achieve an API score of 9?   Staff  
          recommends  targeting this program for low-performing schools  
          only.   

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           None on file.

           Opposition 
           None on file .
           
          Analysis Prepared by :    Kimberly Rodriguez / ED. / (916)  
          319-2087