BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair
SB 344 (Padilla) - English Learners: Supplemental Funding
Amended: May 8, 2013 Policy Vote: Education 9-0
Urgency: No Mandate: No
Hearing Date: May 23, 2013 Consultant: Jacqueline
Wong-Hernandez
SUSPENSE FILE.
Bill Summary: SB 344 establishes conditions to be met by local
educational agencies (LEAs) for receiving state supplemental
funding for English learners (ELs).
Fiscal Impact:
Potentially significant local costs to adopt and renew the
Masterplan in the manner required by this bill.
Accountability: The California Department of Education
(CDE) estimates that it would require approximately $1
million - $1.3 million in annual staffing costs to review
Masterplans.
Background: Existing law provides economic impact aid (EIA)
funding to school districts based on the number of economically
disadvantaged pupils and ELs enrolled in the school district,
and requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to
perform specified calculations to determine the amount of this
funding to be received by a district each fiscal year. School
districts with a higher concentration of these pupils receive
additional funding. The school district is required to expend
these funds on specified programs and activities to support
programs and activities designed to assist ELs achieve
proficiency in their English language as rapidly as practicable
and to support programs and activities designed to improve the
academic achievement of ELs and economically disadvantaged
pupils. The district is prohibited from expending these funds at
school sites that do not have ELs or economically disadvantaged
pupils. These funds must supplement, and not supplant, existing
resources at the school site. (Education Code � 54020-54028)
Existing law specifically requires, as a condition of the
receipt of EIA funds, that a school district post online and in
SB 344 (Padilla)
Page 1
an easily accessible location the amount of EIA allocated to the
district, the amount used for administrative costs, the amount
expended for EL students and the amount expended for
compensatory education in the current and in the prior fiscal
year by the district and by each school in the district, and the
amount of unexpended aid along with an explanation of why these
funds have not been expended. (EC � 54029)
Existing law provides that if the Legislature does not enact
legislation that continues the bilingual education program
(which sunset on June 30, 1987), the funding for that program is
required to continue for the general purposes of that program as
specified in the sunsetted statutes. Current law requires that
funds be disbursed according to identification criteria and
allocation formulas for the program in effect on the sunset date
and that these funds be used for the intended purposes of the
program. Current law also requires the continuation of parent
advisory committees and school site councils, and specifically
provides that any school receiving EIA or Bilingual Education
Aid subsequent to the sunset of these programs is required to
establish a school site council and that the functions and
responsibilities of such advisory committees and school site
councils continue. (EC � 62000-62005.5)
Proposed Law: SB 344 establishes conditions to be met by school
districts in order to receive state supplemental funding to
serve English learners, beginning in fiscal year 2014-15.
Specifically, this bill requires that a district:
1) Adopt a Masterplan that is: a) developed with the input of
teachers, principals, administrators, EL advisory
committees, school site councils and parents both district
wide and from each school; and, b) outlines how these
supplemental funds will be spent at each affected school
site and at the district level.
2) Include all of the following in the Masterplan: a) A
requirement that the district comply with existing law that
requires the posting of specified EIA information on the
district's internet website; b) a listing of services and
instructional materials categorized by proficiency levels;
c) the names, positions, credentials and authorizations for
each district and school site staff member assigned to ELs;
d) a professional development plan for district and school
SB 344 (Padilla)
Page 2
site staff and volunteers. e) a plan for engaging and
involving parents of English learners in their children's
education; and f) a calendar for release of data, a plan
for monitoring reclassified and long term ELs, benchmarks
for progress, and a plan for the collection and publication
of relevant data.
3) Renew the Masterplan annually, with input from specified
parties, and make the Masterplan easily available to the
public.
4) Establish an English learner advisory committee (ELAC) at
each school and at the District level (DELAC) and that the
district level committee be composed of members from the
schools' ELACs.
5) Require that each school's contribution to the Masterplan
be submitted to, reviewed, and approved by the school ELAC,
and then to the DELAC.
Related Legislation: AB 2193 (Lara) Ch.427/2012 established
definitions of "long-term English learner" and "English learner
at risk of becoming a long-term English learner" and requires
the CDE to annually ascertain and provide to LEAs the number of
pupils in each school district and school, as specified, who
are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners.
Staff Comments: This bill would require, beginning in 2014-15,
as a condition for receiving any supplemental funds for ELs, a
school district adopt a master plan for how those supplemental
funds will be spent, as specified. This requirement would result
in significant costs to LEAs, to the extent that they do not
already develop plans for spending supplemental EL funds that
meet the new requirements and plan development procedures.
Federal law requires that LEAs receiving federal funds
(administered by the CDE, and passed through to LEAs) submit a
plan that is substantially similar, though not identical, to the
requirements of this bill.
This bill appears to place its requirements primarily on LEAs
applying for funding but, because it makes the comprehensive
master plans that it requires a condition of receiving state
supplemental funding for ELs, the bill appears to require annual
master plan review by the CDE in order to ensure compliance with
SB 344 (Padilla)
Page 3
these requirements to receive funding. The CDE indicates that it
does not currently review extensive master plans, but rather
focus only on an LEA's EL improvement plans every other year.
The CDE estimates that the annual review of master plans, as
specified in this bill could require 5 to 7 Education Programs
Consultants, 1 Associate Governmental Programs Analyst, and 1
Office Technician; the cost would be $1 million - $1.3 million
total for all positions.
Staff notes that as part of the 2013-14 Governor's Budget, the
Administration proposes to restructure the existing K-12 finance
system and to primarily fund schools using a new formula known
as the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The LCFF proposal
would provide a base grant for each pupil, a supplemental grant
amounting to 35% of the base grant for each pupil who is an EL
or low-income, as specified; it also provides an additional
grant for school districts with concentrations of EL and
low-income students above 50%. It is not clear if, or how, the
LCFF supplemental funding for ELs would be affected by this bill
or the degree to which the local accountability plans required
under LCFF would meet the requirements of this bill.