BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Carol Liu, Chair
2013-2014 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 1082
AUTHOR: Huff
AMENDED: March 26, 2014
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: April 2, 2014
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Daniel Alvarez
SUBJECT : State Department of Education: parent resources
Internet Web site.
SUMMARY
This bill requires the State Department of Education (SDE) to
create a parent resources Internet web site that provides
information in numerous areas, as specified.
BACKGROUND
The California Constitution specifies that a Superintendent of
Public Instruction (SPI) shall be elected by the people at each
gubernatorial election. The Constitution provides no further
specification of the duties of the SPI. (Article IX, Section 2)
The SPI is the director of the State Department of Education
in whom all executive and administrative functions of the
department are vested. (Education Code � 33301)
Open Enrollment Act
The purpose of the Open Enrollment Act is to improve student
achievement and enhance parental choice in education by
providing additional options to pupils to enroll in public
schools throughout the state without regard to the residence of
their parents. The Open Enrollment Act provides students
enrolled in one of the 1,000 Open Enrollment schools, as
identified pursuant to statute by the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI), the option to enroll in a school within the
same district or any other district provided the school to
which they are applying has a higher Academic Performance Index
(API) score than the pupil's school of residence.
(EC � 48350 et. seq.)
School Districts of Choice
SB 1082
Page 2
Current law authorizes inter-district transfers known as
"school districts of choice" in which the governing board of a
school district may declare a district to be a district of
choice that is willing to accept a specified number of
inter-district transfers. A district of choice is not required
to admit pupils but the pupils that it does elect to admit must
be selected through a random process that prohibits enrollment
based on academic or athletic performance. School districts of
choice must give priority for attendance to siblings of
children already in attendance in that district. A district of
choice may reject the transfer of a pupil if the transfer of
that pupil would require the district to create a new program
to serve that pupil, but prohibits a district of choice from
rejecting the transfer of special needs pupils, individuals
with exceptional needs, and English learners. Districts of
choice are required to collect specific data about the students
who transfer to their district and report that data to
surrounding districts and the state. These provisions are
currently scheduled to become inoperative on July 1, 2016.
(EC � 48300 et. seq.)
Parent Empowerment
As part of California's application for the federal Race to the
Top, the Parent Empowerment Act was established to authorize
parents of certain low achieving schools to petition, as
specified, for the implementation of one of five specific
interventions. The five interventions are:
1) Transformation model - Replace the principal, provide
professional development and financial incentives, develop
strategies for school improvement.
2) Turnaround model - Replace a principal and 50% of the
staff, flexible governance, provide professional
development, use of pupil data.
3) Restart model - Convert a school to a charter school,
or closing and reopening a school as a charter school.
4) School closure - Close a school and enroll the pupils
in higher achieving schools in the district.
5) Alternative governance pursuant to the federal No Child
Left Behind Act - Major restructuring of the school's
governance that makes fundamental reforms, such as
SB 1082
Page 3
staffing, to improve pupil achievement and has substantial
promise of enabling the school to make Adequate Yearly
Progress. (EC � 53202 and 20 United States Code Section
6301, Section 1116(b)(8)(B)(v))
Unsafe Schools
The Unsafe School Choice Option (USCO) (section 9532 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965, as
amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001) requires that
each State receiving funds under the ESEA establish and
implement a statewide policy requiring that students attending
a persistently dangerous public elementary or secondary school,
or students who become victims of a violent criminal offense
while in or on the grounds of a public school that they attend,
be allowed to attend a safe public school. As a condition of
receiving ESEA funds, each State must certify in writing to the
Secretary of the State that the State is in compliance with
these requirements.
Charter schools
Under existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992 provides
for the establishment of charter schools in California for the
purpose, among other things, to improve student learning and
expand learning experiences for pupils who are identified as
academically low achieving. A charter school may be authorized
by a school district, a county board of education, or the State
Board of Education, as specified. Some charter schools are new
while others are conversions from existing schools. Except
where specifically noted otherwise, California law exempts
charter schools from many of the statutes and regulations that
apply to schools and school districts. According to the State
Department of Education, there were over 1,000 charter schools
(including three statewide benefit charters and 33 approved by
the State Board of Education) with an enrollment of
approximately 456,000 pupils operating in the state in 2012-13.
Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) / Local Control
Accountability Plans (LCAP) . As part of the 2013 Budget Act,
the Legislature enacted the LCFF which 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, English learners, and foster youth),
SB 1082
Page 4
provided for increasing or improving services to these
high-needs students.
The LCFF includes new requirements for local planning and
accountability that 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.
ANALYSIS
This bill requires the State Department of Education (SDE) to
create a parent resources Internet web site that provides
information in numerous areas, as specified. More specifically
this bill:
1) Requires information on the following public school
options, including but not limited to:
a) The Open Enrollment Act.
b) School districts of choice, as specified.
c) Parent empowerment options, as specified.
d) Schools identified as "persistently
dangerous" by the State Board of Education pursuant
to the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
e) Charter schools.
1) Requires school districts and school level reports on
pupil outcomes, including but not limited to:
a) Standardized test scores, including, the
Academic Performance Index, Adequate Yearly Progress,
Standardized Testing and Reporting, and Measurement
of Academic Performance and Progress.
b) Graduation rates.
c) School accountability report cards.
1) Requires personalized information relating to eligibility
for a specific school transfer.
SB 1082
Page 5
2) Requires the inclusion of the state policy for
interdistrict and intradistrict transfers and how parents
can apply for these transfers.
3) Requires the SDE to include relevant information to
individual schools that can be searched using an
interactive database.
4) Requires the SDE to provide a link to the parent resources
Internet Web site on the department's main Internet Web
site.
5) Encourages the SDE to provide the specified information in
both English and Spanish.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author's office, this
measure will provide parents across the state with an
online resource hub for public school options. Parents are
unaware of what school options they actually have or that
they have the right to seek out other schools. By simply
providing their location, the resource website will
enumerate for parents their public school options, help
them compare these options and find what school is right
for their child.
2) Myriad of information does exist . The SDE currently
maintains a web site where vast amounts of information are
accessible to the general public, including most if not
all the information that is being required by this
measure. It could be reasonably argued that the web site
could be more user-friendly; however, the SDE is a
government entity. On the other hand, this committee has
typically sided with providing information for
accountability, transparency to processes and outcomes for
the benefit and use by students, parents, teachers,
administrators and researchers.
Staff recommends amendments that requires, prior to
implementation of a web site, the superintendent must
determine whether the elements prescribed by this measure,
at a minimum, can be developed and maintained consistent
with (1) the department's web site policy, and (2) meet
SB 1082
Page 6
all state and federal requirements for security and
privacy of pupil data and department data.
3) Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) / Local Control
Accountability Plans (LCAP) . The LCFF includes new
requirements for local planning and accountability that
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 (EC � 52060 et.
seq.), the state mandated that school districts, charter
schools, and county offices of education adopt and update
a local control and accountability plan (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, local educational
agencies (LEA) must consult with parents, students,
teachers, and other school employees.
The eight state priorities that must be addressed in the
LCAP, for all students and significant student subgroups
in a school district and at each school, are:
a) Williams settlement issues (adequacy of
credentialed teachers, instructional materials, and
school facilities).
b) Implementation of academic content standards.
c) Parental involvement.
d) Pupil achievement (in part measured by statewide
assessments, Academic Performance Index, and progress
of English-language learners toward English
proficiency).
e) Pupil engagement (as measured by attendance,
graduation, and dropout data).
f) School climate (in part measured by suspension
and expulsion rates).
SB 1082
Page 7
g) The extent to which students have access to a
broad course of study.
h) Pupil outcomes for non-state-assessed courses of
study.
All LEAs adopted LCAPs are required to be maintained on
the LEA web site, as well as the SDE website. (EC � 52065)
Because the work involved in LCFF / LCAP are a tremendous
undertaking, parental involvement in all facets of
developing local goals, achievement toward the eight state
priorities and active engagement of local educational
leaders is critical.
Therefore, staff recommends amendments to include within
the "public school options for parents and pupils, on page
2, between lines 18 and 19 insert?" (F) Local Control and
Accountability Plans, parental involvement in development,
participation, and review of local accountability plans,
pursuant to Article 4.5, Section 52060 et. seq.
1) Much information, but not all required information, is
being compiled within LCAPs . As previously mentioned, the
LCAPs will contain a wealth of information for parents to
hold local school boards accountability for the success of
their schools. Staff recommends an amendment to clarify
the information on page 2, beginning with line19, after
(2) insert: Only to the extent that the information
required by this paragraph is not available within a local
educational agency LCAP.
2) Other recommended technical and clarifying amendments.
Staff recommends the following technical amendments:
On page 2, strike lines 15 and 16, and insert: (D) Schools
identified by the State Board of Education pursuant to the
Unsafe School Choice Option (Section 9532 of ESEA), as
amended by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(20 U.S.C. Section 6301 et. seq.).
On page 2, strike lines 27 and 28, and insert: (3)
information relating to eligibility for specific public
school options based on school of residence and school
district of residence.
SB 1082
Page 8
SUPPORT
EdVoice
Foundation for Parent Empowerment
National Parents Union
Parent Revolution
Parents Advocate League
Students First
United Ways of California
OPPOSITION
None on file.