BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1152
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 1, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Joan Buchanan, Chair
AB 1152 (Ammiano) - As Introduced: February 22, 2013
SUBJECT : School finance: categorical programs
SUMMARY : Removes the California School Age Families Education
Program (Cal-SAFE) from the provisions of law that allows local
educational agencies (LEAs) to use categorical program funds for
any educational purposes and prohibits the program from being
included in any education financing proposal that would
eliminate categorical programs. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes numerous findings and declarations regarding the values,
benefits, and success of the Cal-SAFE program.
2)Expresses the intent of the Legislature for the Cal-SAFE
program to remain a viable, separate program, for the program
to be removed from the Tier 3 maximum categorical flexibility
funding, for the program to be removed from any future
proposed changes to categorical programs, for the program to
operate as a model as specified in statutory and regulatory
language, and for funds not used by LEAs to operate the
Cal-SAFE program to be relinquished to the new Cal-SAFE
program budget line item for establishing new programs or
program expansion.
3)Strikes the Cal-SAFE line item from the provisions of law
allowing LEAs, until the 2014-15 fiscal year (FY), to use
specified categorical funds for any educational purpose.
4)Makes conforming strikeouts in the provisions that implement
the categorical flexibility provisions.
5)Specifies that Cal-SAFE programs operated by school districts,
charter schools, and county offices of education (COEs) shall
be exempt from any new education financing proposal that would
eliminate categorical programs commencing with the FY 2013-14
and all subsequent fiscal years.
6)Requires Cal-SAFE programs operated by school districts,
charter schools, and COEs in the FY 2007-08 to comply,
commencing in FY 2013-14, with the program and funding
AB 1152
Page 2
requirements specified in the Cal-SAFE laws and related
regulations.
7)Specifies that school districts, charter schools, and COEs
selecting not to maintain or reestablish a Cal-SAFE program
shall have the funding received in the annual Budget Act for
the Cal-SAFE program reappropriated to the Budget Act item
related to the Cal-SAFE program in FY 2013-14 and each
subsequent fiscal year. Requires the reappropriated funds to
be restricted to expanding existing Cal-SAFE programs or
establishing new programs serving the specific pupil and child
populations.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Expresses the intent of the Legislature to establish a
comprehensive, continuous, and community linked school-based
program that focuses on youth development and dropout
prevention for pregnant and parenting pupils and on child care
and development services for their children. (Education Code
(EC) Section 54742)
2)Specifies that a male or female pupil, 18 years of age or
younger, may enroll in the Cal-SAFE program and be eligible
for all services afforded to pupils enrolled if he or she is
an expectant parent, the custodial parent, or the noncustodial
parent taking an active role in the care and supervision of
the child, and has not earned a high school diploma or its
equivalent. (EC 54747)
3)Requires a funded agency to conduct an intake procedure upon a
pupil and child entry into the program and requires a funded
agency to determine appropriate levels and types of services
to be provided. Specifies that allowable expenditures for
support services are as follows:
a) Parenting education and life skills instruction.
b) Perinatal education and care, including childbirth
preparation.
c) Safe home-to-school transportation.
d) Case management services.
e) Comprehensive health education, including reproductive
health care.
f) Nutrition education, counseling, and meal supplements.
g) School safety and violence prevention strategies
AB 1152
Page 3
targeted to expectant and parenting teens and their
children.
h) Academic support and youth development services, such as
tutoring, mentoring, and community service internships.
i) Career counseling, preemployment skills, and job
training.
j) Substance abuse prevention education, counseling, and
treatment services.
aa) Mental health assessment, interventions, and referrals.
bb) Crisis intervention counseling services, including
suicide prevention.
cc) Peer support groups and counseling.
dd) Family support and development services, including
individual and family counseling.
ee) Child and domestic abuse prevention education,
counseling, and services.
ff) Enrichment and recreational activities, as appropriate.
gg) Services that facilitate transition to postsecondary
education, training, or employment.
hh) Support services for grandparents, siblings, and fathers
of babies who are not enrolled in the Cal-SAFE program.
ii) Outreach activities to identify eligible pupils and to
educate the community about the realities of teen pregnancy
and parenting. (EC 54746)
4)Requires the funded agency to provide child care and
development program services located on or near the schoolsite
for the children of teen parents enrolled in the Cal-SAFE
program. Specifies the following for the child care and
development component of the Cal-SAFE program:
a) Participation is voluntary.
b) There is no minimum age for enrollment, but the child
shall be eligible for enrollment in until the age of five
years or the child is enrolled in kindergarten, whichever
occurs first, as long as the teen parent is enrolled in the
Cal-SAFE program.
c) A developmental profile shall be maintained for each
infant, toddler, and child. This development profile shall
be utilized by the program staff to design a program that
meets the infant's, toddler's, or child's developmental
needs.
d) The arrangement of the child care site environment shall
be safe, healthy, and comfortable for children and staff,
easily maintained, and appropriate for meeting the
AB 1152
Page 4
developmental needs of the individual child. Child care
sites shall meet the health and safety requirements for
operating child care centers and teachers shall have at
least three semester units, or the equivalent number of
quarter units, of coursework related to the care of infants
and toddlers.
e) The child care site shall be available as a laboratory
for parenting or related courses that are offered by the
funded agency with priority given to pupils enrolled in the
Cal-SAFE program. (EC 54746)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : Categorical Flexibility . There are approximately 60
categorical programs that serve specific goals (e.g., to assist
high school students in passing the high school exit exam) or
for specific programs (e.g., ROC/Ps, special education). There
are also numerous statutes and regulations that specify
allowable use of categorical funds and how funds are allocated.
The FY 2009-10 budget had an important impact on categorical
programs. The budget agreement imposed a 20% reduction on 39
programs and gave LEAs that received those funds in FY 2007-08
the flexibility to use the funds for any educational purposes
from FY 2008-09 through FY 2012-13 (SBX3 4 (Ducheny), Chapter
12, Statutes of the 2009-10 Third Extraordinary Session). This
reduction and flexibility provision is commonly known as "Tier
3" flexibility, which essentially gives LEAs $4.5 billion in
additional unrestricted funds. Tier 1 protected four
categorical programs from cuts and flexibility while 11
categorical programs sustained reductions but were given no
flexibility under Tier 2. For Tier 3 funds, school districts
receive their allocations based on the applicable percentage the
programs received in FY 2007-08. SB 70 (Budget Committee),
chapter 7, Statutes of 2011, extended categorical flexibility to
2014-15. Until 2015-16, LEAs are not required to justify or
report average daily attendance in order to receive the
specified categorical funds.
The 39 Tier 3 programs include: Adult Education, Advanced
Placement Programs, American Indian Early Childhood Education
Centers, American Indian Education Centers, Arts and Music Block
Grant, California Association of Student Councils, CAHSEE -
Instructional Support, California School Age Families Education,
Certificated Staff Mentoring, Charter School Categorical Block
Grant, Child Oral Health Assessments, Civic Education, Class
AB 1152
Page 5
Size Reduction (9th Grade), Community Day Schools,
Community-Based English Tutoring Program, County Office of
Education: Williams Audit, Deferred Maintenance, Educational
Technology - CTAP, Gifted and Talented, Instructional Materials
Block Grant, Mathematics and Reading Professional Development,
National Board Certification Incentives, Peer Assistance and
Review, Physical Education Teacher Incentive Program, Principal
Training Program, Professional Development Block Grant, Public
School Accountability Act, Pupil Retention Block Grant, Regional
Occupational Centers and Programs, Sanctions - High Priority
Schools Grant Program, School and Library Improvement Block
Grant, School Safety Block Grant (8-12), School Safety
Competitive Grants, Specialized Secondary Program Grants,
Supplemental Instruction (Summer School), Supplemental School
Counseling Program, Targeted Instructional Improvement Block
Grant, Teacher Credentialing Block Grant, and Teacher Dismissal
Apportionments.
This bill removes the Cal-SAFE Program from the Tier 3
provisions and specifies that the program shall not be included
in a new financing program that eliminates categorical funding.
The bill further requires LEAs and charter schools that receive
funding to comply with the requirements of the Cal-SAFE program
beginning in FY 2013-14, and if the LEA or charter school
chooses not to maintain the program, the funds shall be used to
expand existing programs or to establish new programs.
The Cal-SAFE Program is a comprehensive, integrated,
community-linked, school based program that serves expectant and
parenting students and their children. Cal-SAFE received $46.4
million in the FY 2012-13 budget. According to the California
Department of Education (CDE), from 2000 to 2010, the program
had enrolled 98,000 expectant and parenting students and 62,000
young children. Funds have been awarded to 164 agencies in 44
counties.
Cal-SAFE provides academic and support services to both female
and male student under 18 who have not graduated from high
school and are expectant, custodial or non-custodial parents. A
student with an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) is eligible
as long as there is an active IEP. The purpose of the program
is to enable the student to graduate from high school and go on
to higher education, technical school or enter the workforce.
The program provides enrollees with effective parenting skills
and their children with child care, health screenings, and early
AB 1152
Page 6
childhood development programs. As long as teen parents are
enrolled in the program, their children are eligible for
services until age five or entry into kindergarten. According
to a 2012 report to the Legislature, the CDE reports that:
Over 75 percent of the students left the Cal-SAFE
Program having successfully completed their high school
education. This graduation rate for teen mothers far
exceeds the 20 percent rate cited in the authorizing
legislation as a deficit needing action. Over 65 percent of
the exiting students indicated that they would pursue
further education or employment. Most planned to enroll in
a local community college.
Overwhelmingly, students in the Cal-SAFE Program did not
have a repeat birth or father a repeat pregnancy while
enrolled in the program. Less than 3 percent of the
students were expecting another child when they enrolled or
exited the program. Less than 1 percent had a repeat
pregnancy while enrolled in the program.
The vast majority of children born while their parents
were enrolled in the Cal-SAFE Program were healthy. Only
7.29 percent weighed less than 2,500 grams at birth (the
definition of low birth weight). This percentage is lower
than the national low birth weight rate of 13.8 percent for
mothers under 15 and 9.9 percent for mothers aged 15 to 19.
Over 75 percent of the children of Cal-SAFE students
attended a child care center sponsored by the Cal-SAFE
Program and received programming and services based on
their assessed developmental needs. Furthermore, 94 percent
of the children enrolled in child care sponsored by the
Cal-SAFE Program were up-to-date on their immunization
schedules. This percentage substantially exceeds the
immunization rates for children 19 to 35 months nationally
(82 percent) and in California (81 percent).
Impact of Tier 3 flexibility : In 2011, the Legislative
AB 1152
Page 7
Analyst's Office (LAO) released the results of a survey of
school districts on budgeting decisions following flexibility
authorization. In 2009-10, approximately 40 percent of
districts shifted funds from Cal-SAFE for other uses. In
2010-11, almost 60 percent of districts shifted Cal-SAFE funds.
In 2009-10, no districts discontinued the Cal-SAFE program, but
by 2010-11, 11 percent of respondents had terminated the
Cal-SAFE program.
A 2012 evaluation provided by the author's office confirms the
impact of categorical flexibility. According to the report, the
number of expectant or parenting students served dramatically
decreased. During the 2007-08 school year, 145 Cal-SAFE
agencies served 13,270 students. By the 2011-12 school year,
there were only 118 Cal-SAFE agencies serving almost 7,000
students.
FY 2013-14 Budget . The Governor's FY 2013-14 budget proposal
includes a new formula and methodology for K-12 funding called
the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The LCFF would
replace revenue limit funding and separate categorical program
funding with a uniform per-pupil rate based on K-3, 4-6, 7-8,
and 9-12 grade spans, augmented by supplemental funding based on
additional needs of students, such as English learners or
students from low income families. Cal-SAFE is one of the
programs proposed to repealed and folded into the LCFF. This
bill would prohibit the incorporation of Cal-SAFE in the LCFF.
Arguments in Support . The author states, "Pregnant and
parenting teens and their children are a uniquely identified
student population and cannot adequately be served by the
existing K-12 system because it does not take into account
specific issues such as access to quality child care, support
services aimed at student parents, prevention services, prenatal
self-care, meal supplements, or parenting and life skills
education. All of these mentioned services are necessary to
increase the possibility of graduation of the student parent and
enhanced school readiness of their children."
Arguments in Opposition . The California Association of School
Business Officials (CASBO) states, "CASBO's opposition centers
around a key tenet of the Association's approach to short- and
long-term funding reform for California schools - to preserve
funding flexibility over the use of categorical program funds in
AB 1152
Page 8
the short-term as a way to assist local educational agencies
(LEAs) with cash flow issues during uncertain fiscal times, and
flexibility in the long-term to provide local communities with
the ability to decide how best to meet local educational
priorities."
Related legislation . AB 88 (Buchanan), pending in this
Committee, would implement the Governor's Local Control Funding
Formula.
AB 200 (Hagman), pending in this Committee, changes the method
of allocating funds for specified categorical programs and
requires local education agencies to provide reports on the
expenditure of those funds at each schoolsite, as specified.
AB 470 (Mullin), pending in this Committee, removes the Teacher
Credentialing Block Grant from Tier 3 flexibility, makes changes
to the California Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment
Program, and specifies that $321,000 shall be apportioned for
specified strategies to reduce school crime and violence.
AB 1186 (Bonilla), pending in this Committee, extends Tier 3
flexibility through 2019-20, provided the recipient LEA spends
at least 7% of the funds on either professional development
related to the implementation of the common core curriculum or
implementation of science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) programs in grades 7 through 12.
AB 1214 (Muratsuchi), pending in this Committee, requires the
annual budget to provide an annual appropriation from the
General Fund directly to the Southern California Regional
Occupational Center (SCROC) for purposes of providing career
technical education services.
SB 223 (Liu), pending in the Senate Appropriations Committee,
extends categorical flexibility in exchange for the recipient
LEA agreeing to specified accountability preconditions.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Child Development Administrator's Association
(sponsor)
California Family Resource Association
AB 1152
Page 9
Child Care Alliance of Los Angeles
Child Development Policy Institute
Options - A Child Care and Human Services Agency
Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California
Planned Parenthood Mar Monte
Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest
Professional Association for Childhood Education
San Francisco Adolescent Health Working Group
Santa Barbara Unified School District's Cal-SAFE Program
Teen Success, Inc.
Many individual Cal-SAFE participants
Opposition
California Association of School Business Officials
Riverside County Superintendent of Schools
Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087