adult history LAO Analysis of the May Revise for Adult Ed Budget - japraklupo

LAO - Hallo sahabat fashion, Pada Artikel yang anda baca kali ini dengan judul LAO, kami telah mempersiapkan artikel ini dengan baik untuk anda baca dan ambil informasi didalamnya. mudah-mudahan isi postingan Artikel Budget, Artikel Facts, Artikel LAO, yang kami tulis ini dapat anda pahami. baiklah, selamat membaca.

Judul : adult history LAO Analysis of the May Revise for Adult Ed Budget - japraklupo
link : adult history LAO Analysis of the May Revise for Adult Ed Budget - japraklupo

LAO

The LAO is the Joe Friday of Government.  It is the job of the LAO - the Legislative Analyst Office - to analyze things and then provide "just the facts" and yes, some recommendations, too.

So here they are the May Revise of the Budget for Adult Ed.


 

May 18, 2015

LAO

 

 

Various Improvements in

May Revision Proposal

Improvements Description

Hit the "read more" link to get the facts.

Strengthens Governance and Accountability

 

• Replaces allocation board with a governance structure determined by each regional

 

consortium.

• Requires that a consortium member be represented only by an offi cial designated

by the member’s governing board.

• Requires that consortia consider proposed decisions (including approving

regional plans and allocation schedules) at public meetings, request feedback from

stakeholders, and consider and respond to comments about these decisions.

• Requires alignment of consortia data with other adult and workforce education data.

Better Incorporates Other Adult Education Funding

• Requires each consortium’s plan to reflect all funding for adult and workforce

education in the region.

• Requires that entities receiving state funding for education programs serving

adults be members of consortia.

• Requires Chancellor and Superintendent to develop a plan to distribute federal

adult education funding to consortia.  Provides Earlier Funding Information to

Consortia

• Advances date that Chancellor and Superintendent must certify hold harmless

amount by one month, to July 30, 2015.

• Requires state to provide consortia, and consortia to provide local providers,

nonbinding two-year funding projections.  Paves Way for More Consistent Regional

Policies

• Requires regional adult education plans to include information about how consortia

members are coordinating placement, academic standards, qualifications for

instructors, and collection of data across providers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Locks in Individual Provider Funding Levels.

 

 

Limits consortia’s ability to respond to changes in regional demand for adult and workforce

education by prohibiting year-to year reductions to a member’s funding (or disproportionate

reductions in the event of budget shortfalls) except under narrow circumstances.

 Some Details Still Missing.

 

Lacks specific program goals (such as expected levels of service)

 

and effectiveness measures. Does not provide Legislature with notice prior to allocation of

state funds. Lacks statewide alignment of policies for student assessment, accountability

 

(including use of common student identifiers), and student fees.

 

 

 

Room for Improvement

 
 

 Do Not Lock in Provider Funding Levels. We recommend

rejecting statutory language that locks in funding levels for

consortium members. Purpose of consortium approach was to

increase state’s fl exibility to meet adult and workforce education

needs in each region. Proposal would minimize fl exibility.

 Develop Clear Measures of Effectiveness Based on Initial

Local Performance Reports. Consortia are required to include

measures of effectiveness in their reports to the state. The

Legislature could use the best approaches from these initial

reports to defi ne consistent measures of effectiveness across

consortia going forward.

 Require Notice of Allocations. Require the Chancellor and

Superintendent to provide 30-day notice to the Legislature of

the allocation methods it develops before disbursing funds to

consortia.

 Set Deadline for Adopting Consistent Adult Education

Policies. Require Chancellor and Superintendent, in

collaboration with the California Workforce Investment Board, to

develop consistent state policies and actionable implementation

plans in the areas of student assessment, accountability

(including use of common student identifi ers), and student

fees by July 1, 2016. Make continued funding of three adult

education staffi ng positions at each CDE and Chancellor’s Offi ce

contingent on meeting the new deadline.

The LAO is the Joe Friday of Government.  It is the job of the LAO - the Legislative Analyst Office - to analyze things and then provide "just the facts" and yes, some recommendations, too.

So here they are the May Revise of the Budget for Adult Ed.


 

May 18, 2015

LAO

 

 

Various Improvements in

May Revision Proposal

Improvements Description

Hit the "read more" link to get the facts.

Strengthens Governance and Accountability

 

• Replaces allocation board with a governance structure determined by each regional

 

consortium.

• Requires that a consortium member be represented only by an offi cial designated

by the member’s governing board.

• Requires that consortia consider proposed decisions (including approving

regional plans and allocation schedules) at public meetings, request feedback from

stakeholders, and consider and respond to comments about these decisions.

• Requires alignment of consortia data with other adult and workforce education data.

Better Incorporates Other Adult Education Funding

• Requires each consortium’s plan to reflect all funding for adult and workforce

education in the region.

• Requires that entities receiving state funding for education programs serving

adults be members of consortia.

• Requires Chancellor and Superintendent to develop a plan to distribute federal

adult education funding to consortia.  Provides Earlier Funding Information to

Consortia

• Advances date that Chancellor and Superintendent must certify hold harmless

amount by one month, to July 30, 2015.

• Requires state to provide consortia, and consortia to provide local providers,

nonbinding two-year funding projections.  Paves Way for More Consistent Regional

Policies

• Requires regional adult education plans to include information about how consortia

members are coordinating placement, academic standards, qualifications for

instructors, and collection of data across providers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Locks in Individual Provider Funding Levels.

 

 

Limits consortia’s ability to respond to changes in regional demand for adult and workforce

education by prohibiting year-to year reductions to a member’s funding (or disproportionate

reductions in the event of budget shortfalls) except under narrow circumstances.

 Some Details Still Missing.

 

Lacks specific program goals (such as expected levels of service)

 

and effectiveness measures. Does not provide Legislature with notice prior to allocation of

state funds. Lacks statewide alignment of policies for student assessment, accountability

 

(including use of common student identifiers), and student fees.

 

 

 

Room for Improvement

 
 

 Do Not Lock in Provider Funding Levels. We recommend

rejecting statutory language that locks in funding levels for

consortium members. Purpose of consortium approach was to

increase state’s fl exibility to meet adult and workforce education

needs in each region. Proposal would minimize fl exibility.

 Develop Clear Measures of Effectiveness Based on Initial

Local Performance Reports. Consortia are required to include

measures of effectiveness in their reports to the state. The

Legislature could use the best approaches from these initial

reports to defi ne consistent measures of effectiveness across

consortia going forward.

 Require Notice of Allocations. Require the Chancellor and

Superintendent to provide 30-day notice to the Legislature of

the allocation methods it develops before disbursing funds to

consortia.

 Set Deadline for Adopting Consistent Adult Education

Policies. Require Chancellor and Superintendent, in

collaboration with the California Workforce Investment Board, to

develop consistent state policies and actionable implementation

plans in the areas of student assessment, accountability

(including use of common student identifi ers), and student

fees by July 1, 2016. Make continued funding of three adult

education staffi ng positions at each CDE and Chancellor’s Offi ce

contingent on meeting the new deadline.

adult history The Truth Is K12 Adult Schools Need Dedicated Funding - japraklupo

LAO - Hallo sahabat fashion, Pada Artikel yang anda baca kali ini dengan judul LAO, kami telah mempersiapkan artikel ini dengan baik untuk anda baca dan ambil informasi didalamnya. mudah-mudahan isi postingan Artikel Action Step, Artikel Budget, Artikel CCAE, Artikel Designated Funding Stream, Artikel Grassroots, Artikel How Things Work, Artikel K-12 Adult Ed, Artikel LAO, Artikel Public Education, Artikel Regional Consortia, Artikel Think About It, yang kami tulis ini dapat anda pahami. baiklah, selamat membaca.

Judul : adult history The Truth Is K12 Adult Schools Need Dedicated Funding - japraklupo
link : adult history The Truth Is K12 Adult Schools Need Dedicated Funding - japraklupo

LAO

The December 2012 LAO - Legislative Analyst Office - Report on Adult Education has served in many ways as a template for reform in Adult Education.

(Click here to read the report:  Restructuring California's Adult Education System.)

But one important recommendation - to reinstate Adult Education as a categorical when flexibility ends in June of 2015 - has been ignored.

Reinstating Adult Ed as a categorical may or may not be a viable option.  Many think it's not politically possible. 

But the ever-increasing number of signatures on the Restore Protected Funding for K-12 Adult Education Petition, CCAE's Legislative Update and Call to Action Webinar, and grassroots action around the state all make one thing clear:

K12 Adult Education needs a stable source of funding separate from the community college system.

Within the Regional Consortia system, both Community Colleges and K12 Adult Schools are mandated to provide Adult Education, but only Community Colleges have secure funding. And they will continue to have secure funding because their funding exists independent of the Regional Consortia system.  They have apportionment (this is what their funding is called).  They are secure.  On top of their apportionment money, they may get extra money for Adult Education - which may come in through the Community College Chancellor's Office.

K12 Adult Schools are not secure.  K12 Adult Schools are not safe.  K12 Adult Schools have been mandated to do a job but haven't been given the means to do the job and can't properly prepare to do it, given the fact they don't know what the future holds.

This is the plain truth.
 
It is a also a truth some folks have danced around when asked to explain how K12 Adult Schools can survive this challenge.  And it is a truth that has sometimes created division amongst Adult Ed advocates in their desperation to figure out a way to save K12 Adult Schools.

It is not, however, a truth which K12 Adult Schools or their advocates created.

It is just a truth they must face...  that K12 Adult Schools, themselves, need stabilizing if they are to continue on as the stabilizing fourth leg of California's Public Education system.


In what form that stability will come - a return to categorical status, some new form of dedicated funding specific to K12 Adult Schools, or some other way - we don't know. 

We just know if it doesn't happen, more K12 Adult Schools will collapse, which will destabilize our public education system, economy, and social stability.

This December 2012 Edsource article provides helpful information.   I've highlighted the section with quotes from Paul Steenhausen, who wrote the LAO Report.

Legislative Support Elusive for Adult Ed Funding Plan

December 11, 2012 | By Susan Frey, , and | 1 Comment



California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office says the state’s embattled adult education system needs a dedicated and permanent funding stream that can’t be appropriated for other school programs when the state budget goes south.
 

Restructuring California’s Adult Education System calls for the state Legislature to restore adult education as a categorical program. Adult Ed advocates lauded the proposal, even though it relies on funding that is speculative and requires a commitment from legislators and Gov. Jerry Brown that they have so far not shown.
 

Adult schools are an important strand in the state’s safety net, offering community-based classes to some of the state’s neediest adults, ranging from the unemployed, the disabled and the elderly to ex-offenders reentering society, immigrants trying to learn English and become citizens, and high school dropouts seeking to earn their GEDs.
 

Until the 2008-09 academic year, adult education was funded through one of the dozens of categorical programs that could be used only for their stated purpose. But as part of the February 2009 state budget plan, legislators approved what’s known as “categorical flex,” giving school districts the authority to use funds from 40 categorical programs, including adult education, for any educational purpose.

Chris Nelson, State President of the California Council for Adult Education. Photo courtesy CCAE. (Click to enlarge)

The LAO report says that move signaled “adult schools’ lower priority within the K-12 system.” Since then, local school boards have funneled as much as 70 percent of statewide adult ed funds to support K-12 programs, according to Chris Nelson, president of the California Council for Adult Education.

At least 35 programs have shut down as a result, and many of the 300 remaining programs are operating on shoestring budgets. Altogether, the LAO estimates that in 2011-12, the state and federal governments spent about $400 million on district-run adult schools, down from $854 million before flex started.

Many community colleges also offer adult education classes, spending about $1.7 billion last year, according to the LAO, but the colleges take that money from their regular state funding and not from separate categorical accounts.

Categorical flex is due to expire at the end of the 2014-15 school year, and the LAO is recommending that starting in 2015-16 adult education be restored as a categorical program with a dedicated funding stream. The program is a good candidate for restoration of funds, said Paul Steenhausen, who wrote the LAO report, because it reaches a distinct, underserved population.



“Adult education is a different animal,” Steenhausen said. Because it doesn’t serve K-12 students, it is “fundamentally different from other categoricals.”

However, many observers believe that the current level of flexible funding will continue beyond 2014-15 unless Gov. Brown convinces the Legislature to reconfigure the school finance system using a weighted student formula (WSF). Under this approach, money would follow the student, so schools enrolling students with greater needs, such as English learners and those from low-income families, would receive more funds. When Gov. Brown first proposed WSF last January, he didn’t support separate funding for adult education, leading advocates to oppose it.

Even the recent passage of Proposition 30, which increases funding to schools through a combination of a small sales tax increase and higher income taxes on the wealthiest Californians, has not revived support for adult education, according to Nelson.

“We’re still hearing that programs are being threatened with being cut more,” Nelson said. “I have not heard of anybody who has said they’re going to get an increase because of Prop. 30.”

Roadmap to restructuring Adult Ed, California Legislative Analyst’s Office. (Click to enlarge)

Instead, Nelson said he believes that school districts will be under pressure to use increased revenues to provide raises for teachers. “We’re all fighting for every little dollar, and it’s unfortunate how this has played out – one program against another.”

Nelson described the situation in Sonoma County, which had 11 adult education schools a few years ago, but has only one remaining program, in Petaluma. That program is being inundated by prospective students from all over the county. Nelson expects that Petaluma, which doesn’t have the capacity to serve so many people, will soon have to restrict its program to city residents.

One reason adult education may lack support from some legislators is the program’s uneven distribution across the state. Adult ed schools are more common in urban than rural communities.
The LAO report addresses this issue. The LAO is predicting that as the economy improves, the state will soon be receiving more funds that must be spent on K-14 education. The report recommends that some of this new money should be allocated to adult education based on regional needs and the ability of districts, colleges and local businesses to work as a team to avoid duplication of services and provide smooth pathways for students to jobs and college. The LAO also recommends that funding be allocated based on student outcomes – such as how many successfully complete courses – the way federal funds are now distributed.

But, finally, “the bigger issue is how is adult ed going to get funded,” Nelson said. “The LAO does recommend designated funding for adult ed, and that’s very key.”

Going deeper

At Risk: Adult Schools in California, EdSource, June 2012
California Council for Adult Education
Restructuring California’s Adult Education System, Legislative Analyst’s Office, Dec. 5, 2012
Video: Paul Steenhausen, LAO principal fiscal and policy analyst and author of adult ed report, discusses the findings and recommendations.

The December 2012 LAO - Legislative Analyst Office - Report on Adult Education has served in many ways as a template for reform in Adult Education.

(Click here to read the report:  Restructuring California's Adult Education System.)

But one important recommendation - to reinstate Adult Education as a categorical when flexibility ends in June of 2015 - has been ignored.

Reinstating Adult Ed as a categorical may or may not be a viable option.  Many think it's not politically possible. 

But the ever-increasing number of signatures on the Restore Protected Funding for K-12 Adult Education Petition, CCAE's Legislative Update and Call to Action Webinar, and grassroots action around the state all make one thing clear:

K12 Adult Education needs a stable source of funding separate from the community college system.

Within the Regional Consortia system, both Community Colleges and K12 Adult Schools are mandated to provide Adult Education, but only Community Colleges have secure funding. And they will continue to have secure funding because their funding exists independent of the Regional Consortia system.  They have apportionment (this is what their funding is called).  They are secure.  On top of their apportionment money, they may get extra money for Adult Education - which may come in through the Community College Chancellor's Office.

K12 Adult Schools are not secure.  K12 Adult Schools are not safe.  K12 Adult Schools have been mandated to do a job but haven't been given the means to do the job and can't properly prepare to do it, given the fact they don't know what the future holds.

This is the plain truth.
 
It is a also a truth some folks have danced around when asked to explain how K12 Adult Schools can survive this challenge.  And it is a truth that has sometimes created division amongst Adult Ed advocates in their desperation to figure out a way to save K12 Adult Schools.

It is not, however, a truth which K12 Adult Schools or their advocates created.

It is just a truth they must face...  that K12 Adult Schools, themselves, need stabilizing if they are to continue on as the stabilizing fourth leg of California's Public Education system.


In what form that stability will come - a return to categorical status, some new form of dedicated funding specific to K12 Adult Schools, or some other way - we don't know. 

We just know if it doesn't happen, more K12 Adult Schools will collapse, which will destabilize our public education system, economy, and social stability.

This December 2012 Edsource article provides helpful information.   I've highlighted the section with quotes from Paul Steenhausen, who wrote the LAO Report.

Legislative Support Elusive for Adult Ed Funding Plan

December 11, 2012 | By Susan Frey, , and | 1 Comment



California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office says the state’s embattled adult education system needs a dedicated and permanent funding stream that can’t be appropriated for other school programs when the state budget goes south.
 

Restructuring California’s Adult Education System calls for the state Legislature to restore adult education as a categorical program. Adult Ed advocates lauded the proposal, even though it relies on funding that is speculative and requires a commitment from legislators and Gov. Jerry Brown that they have so far not shown.
 

Adult schools are an important strand in the state’s safety net, offering community-based classes to some of the state’s neediest adults, ranging from the unemployed, the disabled and the elderly to ex-offenders reentering society, immigrants trying to learn English and become citizens, and high school dropouts seeking to earn their GEDs.
 

Until the 2008-09 academic year, adult education was funded through one of the dozens of categorical programs that could be used only for their stated purpose. But as part of the February 2009 state budget plan, legislators approved what’s known as “categorical flex,” giving school districts the authority to use funds from 40 categorical programs, including adult education, for any educational purpose.

Chris Nelson, State President of the California Council for Adult Education. Photo courtesy CCAE. (Click to enlarge)

The LAO report says that move signaled “adult schools’ lower priority within the K-12 system.” Since then, local school boards have funneled as much as 70 percent of statewide adult ed funds to support K-12 programs, according to Chris Nelson, president of the California Council for Adult Education.

At least 35 programs have shut down as a result, and many of the 300 remaining programs are operating on shoestring budgets. Altogether, the LAO estimates that in 2011-12, the state and federal governments spent about $400 million on district-run adult schools, down from $854 million before flex started.

Many community colleges also offer adult education classes, spending about $1.7 billion last year, according to the LAO, but the colleges take that money from their regular state funding and not from separate categorical accounts.

Categorical flex is due to expire at the end of the 2014-15 school year, and the LAO is recommending that starting in 2015-16 adult education be restored as a categorical program with a dedicated funding stream. The program is a good candidate for restoration of funds, said Paul Steenhausen, who wrote the LAO report, because it reaches a distinct, underserved population.



“Adult education is a different animal,” Steenhausen said. Because it doesn’t serve K-12 students, it is “fundamentally different from other categoricals.”

However, many observers believe that the current level of flexible funding will continue beyond 2014-15 unless Gov. Brown convinces the Legislature to reconfigure the school finance system using a weighted student formula (WSF). Under this approach, money would follow the student, so schools enrolling students with greater needs, such as English learners and those from low-income families, would receive more funds. When Gov. Brown first proposed WSF last January, he didn’t support separate funding for adult education, leading advocates to oppose it.

Even the recent passage of Proposition 30, which increases funding to schools through a combination of a small sales tax increase and higher income taxes on the wealthiest Californians, has not revived support for adult education, according to Nelson.

“We’re still hearing that programs are being threatened with being cut more,” Nelson said. “I have not heard of anybody who has said they’re going to get an increase because of Prop. 30.”

Roadmap to restructuring Adult Ed, California Legislative Analyst’s Office. (Click to enlarge)

Instead, Nelson said he believes that school districts will be under pressure to use increased revenues to provide raises for teachers. “We’re all fighting for every little dollar, and it’s unfortunate how this has played out – one program against another.”

Nelson described the situation in Sonoma County, which had 11 adult education schools a few years ago, but has only one remaining program, in Petaluma. That program is being inundated by prospective students from all over the county. Nelson expects that Petaluma, which doesn’t have the capacity to serve so many people, will soon have to restrict its program to city residents.

One reason adult education may lack support from some legislators is the program’s uneven distribution across the state. Adult ed schools are more common in urban than rural communities.
The LAO report addresses this issue. The LAO is predicting that as the economy improves, the state will soon be receiving more funds that must be spent on K-14 education. The report recommends that some of this new money should be allocated to adult education based on regional needs and the ability of districts, colleges and local businesses to work as a team to avoid duplication of services and provide smooth pathways for students to jobs and college. The LAO also recommends that funding be allocated based on student outcomes – such as how many successfully complete courses – the way federal funds are now distributed.

But, finally, “the bigger issue is how is adult ed going to get funded,” Nelson said. “The LAO does recommend designated funding for adult ed, and that’s very key.”

Going deeper

At Risk: Adult Schools in California, EdSource, June 2012
California Council for Adult Education
Restructuring California’s Adult Education System, Legislative Analyst’s Office, Dec. 5, 2012
Video: Paul Steenhausen, LAO principal fiscal and policy analyst and author of adult ed report, discusses the findings and recommendations.