California’s Poorest Students Don’t Need Newsom’s $300 Million Plan, but Transparency: Legislative Analyst

Last month, California’s legislative analyst opposed Gov. Gavin Newsom’s $300 million earmarked in his proposed 2023–24 budget proposal to fix academic gaps and racial disparities in the state’s lowest-income schools—saying the state should focus on accountability and transparency instead.

The additional funds—which Newsom calls “equity multiplier”—came at the push from members of the Legislative Black Caucus, a group of black lawmakers who address legislative concerns for black Americans and other ethnic groups.

“I am … happy to announce that Governor Gavin Newson and his staff have committed to on-going funding and to work with us, to create a comprehensive policy aimed at improving the academic achievement of students in the lowest-performing groups and the related goal of addressing the needs of black students,” Assemblymember Akilahweber (D–San Diego) stated this in a statement made last August. “This proposal will be included in the Governor’s January 2023 budget.”

Newsom’s proposal would see the funds given to the state’s lowest-income school districts. They would then choose where to spend them based on the goals and needs they have set in their plans to address student needs.

Each district creates these plans based on how it meets state standards, such as test scores, chronic absenteeisms and graduation rates. The state then provides money according to the needs.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged lawmakers to reject the funding in a February 23 report. They cited a 2021 study which showed that additional funding doesn’t always result in better outcomes for low-income or low-performing schools.

The Public Policy Institute of California conducted a study and found that only 55 percent of the additional funding granted to districts was spent at the schools that had qualified for it.

“Initial studies … have shown evidence that additional funding has led to improved outcomes for districts with larger shares of supplemental and concentration funding but has not resulted in the same levels of improvement for the lowest-performing schools or subgroups within districts,” The report stated.

Analysts also suggested that districts ensure that their regular needs are met by state funds.

Instead, legislative analysts demanded greater transparency and accountability in order to ensure funds are used to address actual needs.

“We find that the key issue is increasing transparency to ensure existing funding actually targets the highest needs schools and student subgroups,” The legislative report is stated. “Rather than provide more funding, we recommend the legislature consider options to provide greater transparency regarding how funding is spent across schools.”

The state could use this information to see if schools are being targeted at the most need schools, the report stated.

The state could also ask education boards to report publicly on the number credentialed educators, those with less experience than three years, and the student-to-teacher ratios at each school in their districts. This is because most school funding goes towards salaries and benefits.

“This information would give the public and the state a good sense of how funding is spread across schools,” The report stated.

Newsom spokespeople were not immediately available to comment.