BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2617
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 11, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
AB 2617 (Blumenfield) - As Introduced: February 24, 2012
SUBJECT : Pupil retention: dropout recovery programs: funding
report
SUMMARY : Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(SPI), in cooperation with the State Board of Education (SBE)
and the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), to publish a report
and recommendations addressing the adequacy of funding for
dropout recovery programs in California, as specified.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the report be submitted on or before May 31, 2013.
2)Specifies that in preparing the report, the SPI shall review
dropout recovery programs in other states, including, but not
limited to, the Texas Dropout Recovery Pilot Program, the
Texas Optional Flexible School Day Program, and the Arizona
dropout recovery programs authorized by a specified section of
the Arizona Revised Statutes.
3)Makes findings and declarations relative to a study by the
National Governor's Association Center for Best Practices
which concludes that quality alternatives to traditional
comprehensive high schools are lacking and that there are too
few financial incentives for dropout recovery.
4)Finds and declares that research demonstrates that dropout
recovery high schools face added costs and a number of
challenges in reengaging pupils, as specified; and that
successful dropout recovery high schools utilize multiple
strategies to reach the variety of learning modalities of the
population that they serve.
5)Declares that incentives for dropout recovery programs would
increase the number of pupils served and could result in a
significant return on the state's investment.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Defines a dropout recovery high school to be a high school in
AB 2617
Page 2
which 50% or more of its pupils have been designated as
dropouts pursuant to the exit/withdrawal codes developed by
the California Department of Education (CDE). (Education Code
Section (EC) 48070.6)
2)Requires the SPI and the SBE to allow dropout recovery high
schools (DRHS), numbering no more than 10, to report the
results of an individual pupil growth model, that the SPI
certifies as meeting specified criteria, in lieu of other
indicators under the state's alternative accountability
system. Defines a "dropout recovery high school" for this
purpose, as a school offering instruction in any of grades
9-12 in which 50% or more of its pupils are designated as
dropouts pursuant to the exit and withdrawal codes developed
by the CDE and the school provides instruction in partnership
with any of the following:
a) The federal Workforce Investment Act;
b) Federally affiliated Youthbuild programs;
c) Federal job corps training or instruction provided
pursuant to a memorandum of understanding with the federal
provider; or,
d) The California Conservation Corp (CCC) or local
conservation corps certified by the CCC. (EC 52052.3)
3)Requires the SPI to provide an annual report to the
Legislature on the graduation and dropout rates in California
and to make the same report available to the public. (EC
48070.6)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : "Dropout recovery programs" are not defined in the
Education Code and are not defined in this bill; however,
current law defines "dropout recovery high school" (DRHS) in two
different sections of the Code and both sections provide a
different definition. One section defines DRHS as high schools
where 50% or more of its pupils have been designated as dropouts
pursuant to the exit/withdrawal codes developed by the CDE and
are also defined as schools where at least 50% of the enrollees
are dropouts pursuant to CDE designations, and where the school
provides instruction under the federal Workforce Investment Act,
federal Youthbuild programs, federal job corps, or the
California Conservation Corps.
AB 2617
Page 3
This bill requires a study to examine the adequacy of funding of
dropout recovery programs in California and to publish a report
with recommendations. The bill does not stipulate what the
purpose of the report is, and the language lacks specificity on
what the recommendations should focus on. It is widely known
that levels of funding for California schools and specific
programs are inadequate. Moreover, in recent years, state
policies have been shifting away from creating dedicated sources
of funds for specific programs. Instead, there has been a move
to consolidating categorical programs into block grants, and
-due to fiscal constraints- to temporarily giving districts
broad flexibility in the use of categorical funds.
According to the author's staff, the desired outcome of the
report is to obtain a better understanding of the landscape of
dropout recovery in California and the author intends for this
report to include an inventory of existing dropout recovery
programs, the effectiveness of these programs, the funding
streams used for purposes of dropout recovery programs, and the
types of services that are provided in dropout recovery
programs. Staff recommends an amendment to specify the
aforementioned elements to be included in the report.
The bill further requires the report to review dropout recovery
programs in other states including Texas and Arizona, but does
not stipulate the objective in reviewing these specific
programs. If the intended purpose is to identify successful
models for California to follow, no evidence has been provided
to demonstrate that the programs in the aforementioned states
have had a level of success, and thus it is questionable whether
this bill should create the perception of endorsing these
programs. Staff recommends an amendment to eliminate the
reference to the specific programs in the specified states and
instead require the SPI to review dropout recovery programs in
other states, including but not limited to, successful models in
other states.
Previous dropout prevention and recovery efforts : The Dropout
Prevention and Recovery Act, enacted through SB 65 in 1985,
provided funding for dropout prevention programs that include
the Pupil Motivation and Maintenance Program, Alternative
Education Outreach Consultant Program, and the Education Clinic
Program. According to the CDE, the Educational Clinic Program
was designed to return students who had been out of school 45 or
more consecutive days or had been expelled from school to an
AB 2617
Page 4
educational setting. The Educational Clinic Program was
intended to be a type of "dropout recovery" program and
according to CDE, Educational Clinic programs were highly
effective in recovering and retaining students who had not been
attending school. Additional outcomes included successful
transitions to traditional school or to another educational
program, increased reading scores, increased numbers of credits
for graduation. In 2004, SB 65 funds were incorporated into the
Pupil Retention Block Grant. In 2009, as part of budget
actions, the Pupil Retention Block Grant was incorporated into
the categorical flexibility provisions, pursuant to SBX3 4
(Ducheny), Chapter 12, Statutes of the 2009-10 Third
Extraordinary Session, giving school districts the authority to
use funds from 39 categorical funds for any educational purpose
from fiscal year (FY) 2008-09 through 2012-13. Recent budget
actions have extended the flexibility provisions to FY 2014-15.
Relevant study : A study conducted by the Regional Educational
Laboratory at WestEd titled, "Reenrollment of High School
Dropouts in a Large, Urban School District" followed a cohort of
first-time 9th graders in San Bernardino City Unified School
District (SBCUSD) from 2001/02 to 2005/06 and documented their
dropout, reenrollment, and graduation rates. By 2005/06, 45% of
standard graduates had earned regular high school diplomas, 35%
had dropped out at least once during the five years, and 20% had
transferred to other schools and their outcomes were unknown.
Among the dropouts, 31% eventually reenrolled in a SBCUSD high
school during the five years of the study, and 18.4% of these
re-enrollees graduated from a district high school by 2005/06.
The report notes that SBCUSD leaders and school principals
expressed concern about how the district's average daily
attendance (ADA) is affected by dropouts, re-enrollees and by
other transitory students. A district's ADA decreases with
declining enrollments and irregular attendance, both of which
are adversely affected by dropouts and re-enrollees. This study
includes suggestions for changes in policies and practices from
the SBCUSD staff, for example, targeting additional financial
resources for academic, behavioral, and social interventions to
support re-enrollees when they return to school.
The author states, "Students who drop out of high school do so
at great cost to themselves and to the community. A number of
states have developed funding models to encourage schools to
recover students who have dropped out. California has worked to
AB 2617
Page 5
prevent dropouts, but has not made significant efforts to
reengage actual dropouts in high school. By incentivizing
dropout recovery, California can provide schools and districts
the resources to recover out-of-school youth and bring
substantial growth to the state's economy and the students'
communities. AB 2617 would take an important first step to
measure the effective of California's dropout recovery programs,
and bring focus to this underserved community."
Additional suggested amendment : The findings and declarations
in the bill suggest that incentives for dropout recovery
programs would increase the number of pupils served. Whereas
the recovery of high school dropouts is indeed a valuable goal
to pursue, equally important is to retain and prevent dropouts.
The language in the findings and declarations should be
redrafted to avoid the misinterpretation of wanting to create
incentives for programs to increase the number of dropouts and
thus increase the number of pupils served by these programs.
Staff suggests the following amendment: On page 2, lines 29-30,
strike out "dropout recovery programs would increase the number
of pupils served and" and insert, "the recovery of high school
dropouts"
Arguments in support : School for Integrated Academics &
Technologies writes, "By incentivizing dropout recovery,
California can provide schools and districts the resources to
recover out-of-school youth and bring substantial growth to the
state's economy and the students' communities. AB 2617 would
take an important first step to develop the underpinnings of
California's dropout recovery programs and bring focus to this
underserved community."
Related legislation : AB 1668 (Carter) requires a pupil who
passes the general educational development (GED) test be counted
as a transfer for purposes of calculating graduation and dropout
rates if the pupil is enrolled in a dropout recovery high
school. AB 1668 is pending in this Committee.
ACR 134 (Hueso) declares the week of June 4 to June 10,
inclusive, 2012, to be Dropout Recovery Week, and would state
the Legislature's intent to encourage the support of dropout
recovery high schools with creative teaching strategies,
alternative assessments, and adequate resources. ACR 134 is
pending in the Rules Committee.
AB 2617
Page 6
Previous legislation : AB 180 (Carter), Chapter 669, Statutes of
2011 requires the SPI and the SBE to allow DRHS, numbering no
more than 10, to report the results of an individual pupil
growth model, that the SPI certifies as meeting specified
criteria, in lieu of other indicators under the state's
alternative accountability system.
ACR 57 (Carter), Resolution Chapter 32, Statutes of 2011,
declares the week of June 6 through June 12, 2011, to be Dropout
Recovery Week and would state the Legislature's intent to
encourage the support of dropout recovery high schools with
creative teaching strategies, alternative assessments, and
adequate resources.
SB 473 (Price) of 2011 requires the Annual Report on Dropouts in
California to include information on the number of schools in
the state that offer dropout prevention or dropout recovery
programs, as specified. SB 473 was held in the Assembly
Appropriations Committee.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
San Francisco Unified School District
School for Integrated Academics & Technologies
United Teachers Los Angeles
YouthBuild Charter School of California
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Marisol Avi�a / ED. / (916) 319-2087