BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 839
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Patrick O'Donnell, Chair
AB 839
(Travis Allen) - As Introduced February 26, 2015
SUBJECT: School accountability: local control and
accountability plans: California Collaborative for Educational
Excellence
SUMMARY: Adds two new members to the board of the California
Collaborative for Education Excellence (CCEE). Specifically,
this bill:
1)Adds a representative of charter schools appointed by the
Governor to the CCEE.
2)Adds a parent of a California public school pupil appointed by
the Joint Committee on Rules to the CCEE.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the CCEE, whose purpose is to advise and assist
local education agencies (LEAs) in achieving the goals set
AB 839
Page 2
forth in their local control and accountability plans (LCAPs).
2)Requires the CCEE to be governed by a five-member board
consisting of the following members:
a) The SPI or his or her designee;
b) The president of the SBE or his or her designee;
c) A county superintendent of schools appointed by the
Senate Rules Committee;
d) A teacher appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; and
e) A superintendent of a school district appointed by the
Governor.
3)Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in
consultation with the State Board of Education (SBE), to
contract with an LEA to serve as the fiscal agent for the
CCEE.
4)Requires the fiscal agent, at the direction of the CCEE
governing board, to contract with individuals, LEAs, or
organizations with the expertise, experience, and a record of
success to provide assistance to LEAs that are failing to meet
specified performance objectives.
5)Authorizes the SPI to direct the CCEE to advise and assist an
LEA in any of the following circumstances:
a) The governing board of the LEA requests the advice and
assistance of the CCEE;
b) The superintendent of schools in the county in which the
school district or charter school is located determines
that the advice and assistance of the CCEE is necessary to
help the school district or charter school accomplish the
goals it has set in its LCAP; or
c) The SPI determines the advice and assistance of the CCEE
is necessary to help an LEA accomplish the goals it has set
in its LCAP.
6)Requires LEAs to adopt an LCAP by July 1, 2014 using a
AB 839
Page 3
template adopted by the SBE and requires that the LCAP:
a) Be updated every year and renewed every three years;
b) Be developed in consultation with teachers, principals,
administrators, other school personnel, parents, and
pupils;
c) Include annual achievement goals for all pupils,
including specified pupil subgroups, and a description of
actions that will be taken to achieve those goals;
d) Address the following eight state priorities:
i) Requirements related to the Williams v. State of
California settlement agreement related to fully
credentialed teachers, instructional materials, and
school facilities;
ii) Implementation of academic and performance
standards, including English language development
standards;
iii) Parental involvement;
iv) Pupil achievement, as measured by statewide
assessments;
v) Pupil engagement, as measured by attendance, dropout
and graduation rates, and expulsions/suspensions;
AB 839
Page 4
vi) School climate, as measured by suspension rates,
expulsion rates, and other local measures, such as
surveys;
vii) The extent to which pupils have access to and are
enrolled in a broad course of study; and
viii) Pupil outcomes, if available, for non-state-assessed
courses of study.
e) Be aligned with the district's budget and describe how
the district will "increase or improve services for
unduplicated pupils in proportion to its increase in funds
apportioned on the basis of the number and concentration of
unduplicated pupils in the district."
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: The CCEE and LCAP were both established as the
accountability component of the Local Control Funding Formula
(LCFF). The purpose of the CCEE is to provide advice and
assistance to LEAs that persistently fail to achieve specified
pupil outcome goals. LEAs also may seek assistance from the
CCEE on their own.
Existing law requires the SPI, with the approval of the SBE, to
contract with an LEA or a consortium of LEAs to serve as the
CCEE's fiscal agent. In addition, existing law requires the
CCEE to be governed by a board consisting of the following:
AB 839
Page 5
The SPI or his or her designee;
The president of the SBE or his or her designee;
A county superintendent of schools appointed by the
Senate Rules Committee;
A teacher appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly; and
A superintendent of a school district appointed by the
Governor.
The SPI has contracted with the Riverside County Office of
Education to serve as the fiscal agent. The CCEE held its first
meeting on February 25, 2015 at which it elected officers,
adopted bylaws, and appointed an ad hoc sub-committee to
initiate the process to search for an executive director.
The CCEE board has only one statutory function. The only
function of the CCEE board is to direct the fiscal agent to
"contract with individuals, local educational agencies, or
organizations with the expertise, experience, and a record of
success" to provide advice and assistance to LEAs. The areas of
expertise and experience required of the individuals, LEAs, or
organizations with whom the fiscal agent contracts must include,
but not necessarily be limited to, the following:
The eight state priorities that must be addressed by
the LCAP;
Improving the quality of teaching;
Improving the quality of school district and
schoolsite leadership; and
Successfully addressing the needs of special pupil
populations, including, but not limited to, English
learners, pupils eligible to receive a free or
reduced-price meal, pupils in foster care, and individuals
with exceptional needs.
AB 839
Page 6
Existing law already permits the fiscal agent to contract with a
charter school representative as appropriate, if that
representative meets the other statutory requirements.
What the CCEE board does not do. The CCEE board does not have a
statutory role in evaluating LEA performance, determining which
LEAs receive advice and assistance, or the delivery of advice
and assistance. Those functions lay with the SPI, county
superintendents of schools, and the individuals and
organizations with whom the fiscal agent contracts to provide
the services. The committee may wish to consider what purpose
would be served by adding new representation to a board that
does not have any "hands on" responsibility for working with
underperforming schools.
How big is big enough? Given the limited scope of the CCEE
board's statutory responsibility, its composition was designed
to include a few members who are broadly representative of the
education community, instead of having a large number of members
representing multiple segments of the education community. This
bill may establish a precedent for other segments of the
education community to also seek representation on the board.
In fact, another bill, AB 1206 (Chu), which also is pending in
the Assembly Education Committee, adds two school district
governing board members to the CCEE. If this bill and AB 1206
are both enacted, board membership would increase from five to
nine members. The committee may wish to consider how large the
CCEE should be in order to fulfill its single statutory role,
whether it is necessary to have representation from multiple
segments of the education community, and-if so-where the line
should be drawn.
Arguments in support. EdVoice argues that "a parent perspective
would be invaluable to the CCEE board. In addition, because of
the high-stakes nature of recommendations that could be
AB 839
Page 7
generated by the CCEE, we believe the voice of a board member
with on-the-ground charter school expertise is critical to the
credibility of the role of the CCEE in providing technical
assistance as well as recommendations on progress toward meeting
LCAP goals as it relates to charter schools."
Arguments in opposition. According to the California School
Boards Association, "Given the purpose of the CCEE to provide
technical assistance to and advise local educational agencies
(LEAs) in the development of their local control accountability
plans, the board should be composed of representatives of those
responsible for developing these plans." The California School
Employees Association (CSEA) argues that it is premature to
change the composition of the CCEE board. However, CSEA states
that "if the committee is inclined to add more members to the
CCEE Board, we would suggest that the committee consider adding
a classified staff representative," because they perform duties
related to all eight state priorities.
Related legislation. AB 1206 (Chu), which is pending in the
Assembly Education Committee, adds two school district governing
board members to the CCEE. Last year's AB 2408 (Allen), which
also added a parent and a charter school representative to the
CCEE, was vetoed by the Governor with the following message:
I am returning Assembly Bill 2408 without my
signature.
This bill would add two new members to the California
Collaborative for Educational Excellence that was
recently established under the Local Control Funding
Formula.
It is premature to alter the composition of the
Collaborative prior to its initial meeting. I would
prefer to see how the Collaborative functions in its
current form before making any changes.
Sincerely,
AB 839
Page 8
Edmund G. Brown Jr.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Charter Schools Association Advocates
EdVoice
Students First
Opposition
California School Boards Association
California School Employees Association
Analysis Prepared by:Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087
AB 839
Page 9