BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de Le�n, Chair
AB 1892 (Bocanegra) - Redesignated Fluent English Proficient
students
Amended: June 26, 2014 Policy Vote: Education 7-0
Urgency: No Mandate: Yes
Hearing Date: August 4, 2014
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-Hernandez
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: This bill, until July 1, 2018, or the adoption of
statewide English learner (EL) reclassification criteria,
whichever comes first, requires that local educational agencies
(LEAs) continue to receive a percentage of supplemental and
concentration grant funding under the Local Control Funding
Formula (LCFF) for two additional years after an EL student has
been reclassified as Fluent English Proficient (RFEP), and
requires that the LEAs provide specified information regarding
these pupils in their Local Control Accountability Plans
(LCAPs).
Fiscal Impact: The costs of this bill will vary each year, based
on the number of RFEP pupils that are in their first two years
after reclassification that are not low-income, and what schools
they attend.
Approximately $80 million - $95 million in additional (Prop
98 General Fund) costs, annually through the 2017-18 school
year, or the adoption of statewide reclassification
criteria, whichever occurs first.
Background: Both federal and state law require that each school
district with EL students annually assess these students'
English language development until they are redesignated as
English proficient. The assessment, the California English
Language Development Test (CELDT), must be administered to all
students whose primary language is not English within 30
calendar days after they are enrolled in a California public
school for the first time, and annually thereafter during a
period of time determined by the Superintendent of Public
Instruction and the State Board of Education (SBE) until they
are RFEP.
AB 1892 (Bocanegra)
Page 1
Current law requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to
establish procedures for conducting the CELDT and for the
reclassification of a pupil from EL to English proficient, as
specified. (Education Code � 313)
In 2013, the LCFF was enacted. The LCFF replaces almost all
sources of state funding, including most categorical programs,
and uses new methods to allocate these resources and future
allocations to school districts, charter schools, and county
offices of education. The LCFF allows LEAs much greater
flexibility to spend the funds than under the prior system. This
formula is designed to provide districts and charter schools
with the bulk of their resources in unrestricted funding to
support the basic educational program for all students, plus
supplemental funding, based on the enrollment of educationally
disadvantaged students (low-income students, ELs, and foster
youth), provided to increase or improve services to these
high-needs students. County offices of education (COEs) receive
different funding levels within the LCFF, based upon the same
allocation principles.
The LCFF allocates resources to LEAs as follows:
1 Base Grants are provided to all school districts and
charter schools. They are calculated on a per-pupil basis
(measured by student average daily attendance) according to
grade span (K-3, 4-6, 7-8, and 9-12) with adjustments that
increase the base rates for grades K-3 (10.4% of base rate)
and grades 9-12 (2.6% of base rate).
2 Supplemental Grants provide an additional 20% in base
grant funding to school districts and charter schools for
each low-income student, EL, and foster youth (unduplicated
pupil count).
3 Concentration Grants provide an additional 50% above
base grant funding to school districts and charter schools
for each low-income student, EL, and foster youth that
exceed 55% of total enrollment. (Charter schools are capped
at the concentration rate of the school district in which
they are located).
The LCFF includes new requirements for local planning and
accountability, including the creation of an LCAP for each
AB 1892 (Bocanegra)
Page 2
school district and charter school, which focus on improving
student outcomes in state educational priorities and ensuring
engagement of parents, students, teachers, school employees, and
the public in the local process. To ensure accountability for
LCFF funds, the required school districts, charter schools, and
COEs adopt and update a LCAP. The LCAP must include locally
determined goals, actions, services, and expenditures of LCFF
funds for each school year in support of the state educational
priorities that are specified in statute, as well as any
additional local priorities. In adopting the LCAP, LEAs must
consult with parents, students, teachers, and other school
employees.
There are 8 state priorities that must be addressed in the LCAP,
for all students and significant student subgroups in a school
district and at each school: 1) Williams settlement issues; 2)
implementation of academic content standards; 3) parental
involvement; 4) pupil achievement; 5) pupil engagement (as
measured by attendance, graduation, and dropout data); 6) school
climate (in part measured by suspension and expulsion rates); 7)
the extent to which students have access to a broad course of
study; 8) pupil outcomes for non-state-assessed courses of
study.
Proposed Law: This bill, until July 1, 2018, or until statewide
pupil redesignation standards are adopted, whichever comes
first:
1) Expands the definition of "unduplicated pupil" to include a
pupil who is RFEP and provides that the pupil shall count
only once for funding purposes.
2) Requires that a COE, a school district, or a charter school
receive 50% and 25% of the supplemental grant and the
concentration grant add on calculated for a pupil who is
redesignated as RFEP for the first and second fiscal years,
respectively, after the redesignation.
3) Enacts implementing provisions to determine LEA funding
calculations for each fiscal year.
4) Expands LCAP state priority reporting requirements
regarding ELs to include identification of any specialized
programs or services provided to RFEPs in order for them to
AB 1892 (Bocanegra)
Page 3
maintain proficiency in English and access the Common Core
standards in the specified areas of study in grades 1-12.
Staff Comments: This bill would provide LEAs with additional
funding for students that have recently (within two years)
designated RFEPs, by adding them (as a category) to the LCFF.
When RFEPs are not low-income (a status that would generate full
supplemental funding, and concentration funding as applicable)
they would generate reduced supplemental and concentration
grants for two years. The costs each year would depend on the
number of RFEP pupils that are in their first and second years
after reclassification (generating 50% and 25% of supplemental
grant funding, respectively) that are not low-income, what
schools they attend (as to whether or not they are eligible for
reduced concentration grant funding), and what grades they are
in (because different grades have different base grant amounts).
In 2013-14 there were 65,298 pupils statewide that were in the
first two years of RFEP, and were not low-income; if this bill
were in effect, those students would have generated the
additional funding it provides. If the pupils had been evenly
split between first and second year RFEP they would have
generated additional supplemental grant funding of $34.1 million
- $41.1 million depending on their grade span distribution. In
addition, if 50% of those students were eligible to receive
concentration grant funding, they would have generated
additional funding of approximately $50 million.