BILL ANALYSIS
AB 296
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 296 (Solorio)
As Amended May 26, 2009
Majority vote
EDUCATION 7-2 APPROPRIATIONS 11-4
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Brownley, Ammiano, |Ayes:|De Leon, Ammiano, Charles |
| |Arambula, Carter, Eng, | |Calderon, Davis, Fuentes, |
| |Solorio, Torlakson | |Hall, John A. Perez, |
| | | |Price, Skinner, Solorio, |
| | | |Torlakson |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+---------------------------|
|Nays:|Garrick, Miller |Nays:|Nielsen, Duvall, Harkey, |
| | | |Audra Strickland |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Establishes requirements for local educational
agencies (LEAs) regarding offering supplemental educational
services (SES). Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires LEAs to provide at least two methods by which parents
or guardians of eligible pupils may submit completed
enrollment forms; and, requires LEAs to provide parents or
guardians of eligible pupils with information about the
availability of SES through at least two channels.
2)Specifies, if a LEA provides outside entities access to school
facilities before school, after school, or both, the LEA shall
permit SES providers the same access; and, specifies those
providers shall comply with the same legal requirements and
fee obligations with which all other outside entities comply.
3)Authorizes school district governing boards to limit SES
provider access to school facilities, if allowing equal access
is impractical due to limited space; and, requires governing
boards, if they elect to limit SES access to facilities, to
develop fair and transparent policies and procedures for
determining which SES providers can serve pupils at each
AB 296
Page 2
schoolsite.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW requires, under the No Child Left Behind
Act, LEAs to provide students from low-income families, who
attend Title I schools that have been identified for a second
year of school improvement, corrective action, or restructuring,
the opportunity to receive SES from a state-approved provider;
and, defines SES as tutoring and other supplemental academic
enrichment services that are provided, in addition to
instruction provided during the school day and are high quality,
research-based, and specifically designed to increase academic
achievement.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor, absorbable General Fund/Proposition 98 costs
to school districts to comply with this measure.
COMMENTS : This bill requires school districts to provide
information to parents regarding SES through at least two
channels and requires school districts to accept SES enrollment
forms by at least two methods. The bill also requires LEAs to
permit SES providers access to school facilities if they
currently allow other entities access to their facilities, but
also allows school boards to limit access to school facilities
if there is a space limitation, as specified. These provisions
are intended to provide greater information flow to families of
eligible students and enable services to be as convenient as
possible for students.
According to the author, there are instances where parents who
have children in program improvement schools are not notified in
a timely fashion regarding their children's eligibility for SES.
In addition, the inability of SES providers to gain access to
school facilities for delivery of their services often creates
obstacles of access and transportation for eligible students,
particularly in rural areas.
SES are educational activities provided outside of normal school
hours that are designed to augment or enhance the educational
services provided during regular periods of instruction, such as
tutoring in specific subject areas and preparation for academic
achievement tests. LEAs are required to provide annual notice
to parents of eligible children about the availability of
AB 296
Page 3
services and information on approved providers. States must
also promote maximum participation by SES providers to ensure
that parents have as many choices as possible. Providers are
required to demonstrate that the services they provide
contribute to the increased academic proficiency of the eligible
children they serve, as measured according to state standards,
in order to retain their status as approved providers.
Federal law states that an LEA that spends less than its 20%
obligation for pupil choice and SES and uses the unexpended
amount for other allowable activities must ensure that SES
providers are given access to school facilities. Federal law
further requires school districts to provide facility access,
using a fair, open, and objective process and on the same basis
and terms as are available to other groups that seek access to
school facilities. This requirement is not imposed on districts
that meet the SES funding obligations.
In March 2009, the California Department of Education (CDE)
proposed regulations to describe the responsibilities that
prospective SES providers, approved providers, LEA, and the
State Educational Agency shall have in ensuring that eligible
students receive appropriate services under SES. The 45-day
public comment period for these regulations ended on May 12,
2009. CDE indicates that the issues addressed in this bill are
being considered as part of this regulatory process.
Los Angeles Unified School District opposes the bill and argues,
offering SES providers similar access to facilities if outside
entities are given access is only in line with federal
guidelines if a district does not encumber 100% of their money.
This will tie the hands of districts like Los Angeles with no
space for 60 providers on one campus and there is no fair method
to choose some providers and not all. This interferes with a
district's right to use its campus as it sees fit.
Analysis Prepared by : Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0000948