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
Various Improvements in
May Revision Proposal
Hit the “read more” link to get the facts.
Strengthens Governance and Accountability
� Replaces allocation board with a governance structure determined by each regional
� 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
� 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
� 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
? 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.