BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1950
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 12, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1950 (Brownley) - As Amended: April 28, 2010
Policy Committee: EducationVote:5-4
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill makes several statutory changes to charter school
accountability and financial compliance. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Requires the Education Audit Appeals Panel (EAAP) to adopt a
charter school supplement to the audit guide (as proposed by
the State Controller) to provide specific guidance on the
charter schools. This measure also requires the SC to consult
with charter school organizations in developing the audit
guide, as specified.
2)Prohibits a charter school from being operated as or by a
for-profit corporation.
3)Allows a charter authorizer, as part of the petition review
process, to consider whether or not the charter petitioner has
operated another charter school for three consecutive years
and any of the following occurred: (a) the charter school
demonstrated academic achievement equivalent to a persistently
lowest-achieving school under the federal Race to the Top
program; (b) the charter school was not renewed (after its
first renewal cycle); or (c) the school's charter was revoked
and not restored.
4)Authorizes a charter renewal to be for a period between one
and five years. This bill also requires the chartering
authority, as one factor in determining renewal, to consider
the degree to which a charter school serves pupil populations
that are similar to local district populations, especially
with high-need pupils (i.e, English language learners, pupils
with disabilities, and poor/needy pupils).
AB 1950
Page 2
5)Changes the charter renewal requirements in the following
manner: (a) requires charter school to meet Academic
Performance Index (API) schoolwide and subgroup targets, and
(b) deletes the authorization for a chartering authority to
renew a charter school if it has achieved "at least equal to
the API of the public schools" the pupils would have otherwise
attended, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT
Annual GF/98 state reimbursable mandated costs of $270,000 to
local education agencies (LEAs) to review and verify specified
petition and renewal information required under this bill. To
the extent that the information required for submission is more
readily available to an LEA than current law requirements, this
cost may be offset. For example, current law, as part of the
renewal process, authorizes a chartering authority to grant a
charter school renewal based on academic performance equal to
schools pupils would have otherwise attended. Statute provides
guidance on information the chartering authority uses to make
this determination. This information may not be as easily
available as the requirements of this measure.
There is a current GF/98 state reimbursable mandate of $2.3
million annually paid to LEAs to review charter school petitions
and renewals, notify charter schools of reasons for revocation,
and administer facility rentals. The cost associated with this
measure will be added to the existing mandate. According to a
May 2006 decision by the Commission on State Mandates (CSM),
charter schools are not eligible to claim mandate
reimbursements. In denying charter schools' mandate claims, the
CSM repeatedly cites the fact that charter schools are
"voluntarily" created.
SUMMARY CONTINUED
6)Prohibits a chartering authority from doing either of the
following: (a) granting a charter renewal for a period longer
than three years if the school is in federal program
improvement (PI) under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB),
and (b) granting a charter renewal for a school that has
entered year five of federal PI under NCLB, has not exited PI,
and did not meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) under NCLB in
the year prior to the renewal.
AB 1950
Page 3
7)Requires the SC, by December 31 of each fiscal year, to
publish a directory of certified public accountants (deemed
qualified by the SC) to conduct audits of charter schools, as
specified.
8)Requires a charter school to select an accountant from the
SC's list to conduct the audit, as specified.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, "The measure ensures
successful conditions for high performing charter schools by
specifying how charter authorizers shall monitor and hold
charter schools accountable, especially with regard to student
achievement. The fiscal accountability standards will ensure
that charter schools receive thorough audits conducted by the
same high quality auditors that conduct school district audits
and clarify that for-profit corporations are prohibited from
operating charter schools. The academic accountability
standards proposed by this bill are directly aligned with the
original legislative intent in establishing charter schools,
which is improved student learning."
2)Existing law requires a potential charter school to submit a
petition to a LEA for approval to establish the school. The
petition is required to include a description of the
educational program of the school. In addition, the initial
petition is required to describe how the proposed charter
school will achieve racial and ethnic balance similar to the
neighboring school district.
This bill allows a charter authorizer, in reviewing the
petition, to consider the petitioner's track record in
operating a charter school, as specified. It also requires
the chartering authority, as part of the charter renewal
process, to consider whether the school serves similar
populations, especially high need pupils, as specified.
Statute authorizes a charter school to be granted one or more
renewals for a five year period.
Current law further requires a charter school to meet one of
the following specified criteria (for the purposes of
renewal): (a) attained its API growth target in the prior year
AB 1950
Page 4
or in two of the last three years; (b) ranked in deciles 4 to
10 on the API in the prior year or in two of the last three
years; (c) ranked in deciles 4 to 10 on the API for a
demographically comparable school in the prior year or in two
of the last three years; and (d) the entity that granted the
charter determines the academic performance of the charter
school is at least equal to the performance of the public
schools the charter pupils would have otherwise attended, as
specified.
This measure, with respect to API performance specified in (a)
above, requires a charter school to meet subgroup (i.e.,
poor/needy, special education, and ELL pupils) targets.
Likewise, this bill deletes the criteria that specifies
charter schools have to perform at least equal to schools
pupils would otherwise have attended (as specified in (d)
above). Instead, it prohibits a charter school in federal PI
under NCLB (i.e., failed to make academic progress) from being
renewed for more than three years. This bill also prohibits
charter schools in federal PI year five from being renewed.
All public schools in federal PI under NCLB are required to
implement certain stages of reform, depending on the PI year.
In PI year five, the local education agency governing the
school is required to implement restructuring/alternative
governance reforms, including converting the school to a
charter school. This bill prohibits a charter school at this
stage of PI from being renewed.
Current law requires charter schools to conduct annual
independent financial audits. This bill requires charter
schools to have the audit conducted by SC approved auditors
and requires the auditors to follow an audit guide developed
by the SC for this purpose. The author contends these changes
are consistent with audits required by non-charter schools.
3)Number of charter schools . As of March 2010, there are 870
active and pending charter schools. Fifty-one of these
schools have a status of "pending" because they have been
locally approved and numbered by the SBE, but the state has
been advised that funding will not be claimed for these
schools until the 2010-11 school year. Of the 870 charter
schools, 25 currently operate based on SBE approval.
4)Related legislation . AB 2320 (Swanson), pending in this
AB 1950
Page 5
committee, amends the charter school petition process and
limits the ability of county boards of education and the State
Board of Education to approve charter petitions and appeals.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081