February 15, 2016
EDCAL 3
Preschool block grant looms in budget
In the 2016-17 state budget proposal released last month, the Brown
Administration indicated $1.6 billion in
existing Proposition 98 funding will be
rolled into a new Early Education Block
Grant. The intent is elimination of statutory
requirements that guide current programs.
Specifically, the proposal consolidates
the California State Preschool Program
($880 million), Transitional Kindergarten
($725 million), and the Quality Rating
Improvement System ($50 million), providing a hold harmless provision for local educational agencies (LEAs) currently administering these services.
Gov. Brown is proposing to establish a
priority system for implementing pre-kindergarten services that would accomplish
the following goals:
• First priority would be for pre-kindergarten services for children from families
with the lowest income, as defined locally,
as well as homeless children, foster children,
children with exceptional needs, children
at risk for abuse and neglect, and English
language learners.
• Educational and social-emotional
needs of young children in the local community should be taken into account when
developing goals and curriculum for an
LEA’s pre-kindergarten program.
• Pre-kindergarten education shall be
developmentally appropriate and delivered
in a manner that engages young children.
Services for pre-kindergarten pupils
would include family engagement, screening for developmental disabilities, and referral to supportive health and social services.
“The administration’s proposal to reimagine Early Childhood Education (ECE)
offerings could serve as an opportunity to
discuss ways to streamline existing administrative challenges and modify the eligibility structures to better align existing
ECE options offered at local levels,” said
Legislative Advocate Martha Alvarez.
LEAs may appreciate the greater local
financial flexibility to better align services
with local needs, yet there have been initial
concerns raised by stakeholders regarding
the quality of programs, the role of nonLEA preschool providers, and the opportunity to continue the existing mixed delivery
system supporting a universal approach
achieved with Transitional Kindergarten,
regardless of income status.
Another significant consideration is that
the ambitious goal of aligning existing ECE
programs with the needs of the local communities is not matched by needed increases
in funding that continues to fall short of
pre-recession levels.
“The proposed block grant is simply the
repurposing of existing funding and does
not provide new augmentations,” Alvarez
said.
In an effort to engage stakeholders, the
Department of Finance is spearheading an
input-gathering process for interested parties through both written feedback and in-
person meetings in Sacramento on Feb. 19
and Feb. 29, with the intent to inform and
shape a more detailed proposal to unveil in
the May budget revision. The Department
of Finance is looking for stakeholders to
answer the following questions:
• Which children should have priority
for service under the Early Education Block
Grant (EEBG)?
• What minimum standards should the
state require of pre-kindergarten programs,
i.e. teacher education and professional
development, class size and teacher ratios,
curriculum, environment/facilities, required
minutes/length of day?
• How can LEAs utilize private providers to help support their prekindergarten
programs? Should private providers have a
role in the EEBG?
• How should future funding augmentations to the EEBG be distributed among
LEAs?
• How should the state ensure EEBG
funding supports positive child outcomes?
ACSA is actively engaged in the deliberations to provide guidance on behalf its
members. As this is the most significant
policy proposal in next year’s budget, the
GR team will look forward to receiving
input from members throughout the state.
ACSA will continue to keep you apprised
of new information on this and other budget issues. To provide feedback or concerns
on this proposal, submit written comments
to Martha Alvarez at [email protected].
AB 375 adds new sick leave benefits for bonding
Gregory Dannis and Loren Carjulia with
the law firm Dannis Woliver Kelley wrote the
following article for EdCal.
Assembly Bill 375 added section 44977.5
to the Education Code, effective Jan. 1,
allowing certificated employees who have
exhausted all available sick leave and continue to be absent while taking a maternity/
paternity leave under the California Family
Rights Act (CFRA; Government Code
section 12945.2) to receive differential pay
for up to 12 school weeks. This “bonding
leave,” is for the birth of a child or placement though adoption or foster care.
AB 375 applies equally to male and
female certificated employees (not classified) who wish to take a maternity or paternity leave and are eligible for leave under
CFRA. To be eligible, the employee must
ha ve at least 1,250 hours of service with the
employer during the previous 12 months.
An employee on CFRA bonding leave is
entitled to differential pay only if she or he
first exhausts all available and accumulated
sick leave. The 12-week differential period
is reduced by any period of sick leave. For
example, an employee who uses six weeks of
accumulated sick leave during bonding leave
– assuming this exhausts available sick leave
– is eligible for
differential pay
for the remaining six weeks
of the 12-week
period.
An
employee who
elects not to
exhaust sick
leave during the bonding leave is ineligible
for differential pay.
This exhaustion requirement is a major
departure from current CFRA law and most
collective bargaining agreements, which do
not allow sick leave to be used for the purpose of bonding leave. Employees may now
unilaterally elect to utilize accumulated sick
leave for bonding leave and, once exhausted,
to receive differential pay for the balance of
the 12 weeks.
Differential pay during the 12-week
leave period is defined as his/her salary
Paid Advertisement
minus the sum that is actually paid or would
have been paid to a substitute employee
to fill the position during the employee’s
absence. AB 375 does not address the “50
percent pay rule” under which a teacher
receives at least 50 percent of his or her salary, rather than the difference between his
or her salary and the amount that would
have been or was actually paid a substitute
(Ed Code section 44983).
We believe the specific language of EC
44977.5 prevails over the general language
of section 44983. Therefore, districts that
have adopted the 50 percent pay rule should
nevertheless calculate differential pay using
the “normal” calculation method in 44977.5.
We believe AB 375 provides a 12-week
entitlement in conjunction with CFRA
leave in addition to any other differential
pay provided under preexisting statutes.
Thus, employees who exhaust their normal
five months of differential pay are also
entitled to up to 12 weeks of differential pay
for bonding purposes under AB 375.
An employee is only provided one
See AB 375, page 8
For those who
attended the annual
Superintendents’
Symposium during the last week of
January, we were privileged to experience an atmosphere of collaboration
and learning. There were exceptional
keynote speakers, breakout sessions
led by national and state leaders, and
a bit of rap, dab and dance led by symposium chair and courageous leader
Darryl Adams.
With the Portola Hotel under construction, we met in a large circus-like tent
outside the hotel. There were some
technical glitches and times when it
appeared the tent might lift off, and
we would find ourselves in the Land of
Oz. However, we were blessed with
good weather, and the symposium
was a big hit.
The ACSA Educational Services
team took the challenge from Darryl
and courageously broke from tradition, starting the conference early
Wednesday morning with a great
session in a question and answer format with students from the California
Association of Student Councils. It was
both stimulating and challenging to
hear directly from students about topics such as LCAP, new state standards,
testing, good teachers and administrators and not so good teachers and
administrators.
Once again ACSA purposefully reminded us why we do what we do, with
students front and center to start the
symposium.
And keynote speakers rocked our
world, including John Couch from
Apple; Kim Papillon, expert on medical, legal and judicial decision making;
Howard Charney from Cisco; researcher/trainer Bob Marzano; as well as
Ron Bennett from School Services and
Kevin Gordon of Capitol Advisors with
a state budget update.
Topics centered around the future of
technology in our schools, equity and
diversity, school finance, school reform
and best practices for student learning. Yet, for me and other colleagues I
spoke with, the highlight of the conference was the learning groups facilitated by state and national leaders,
providing an opportunity for superintendents to learn from each other and
collaborate on best practices.
I was once again privileged as your
state president to attend the Women’s
Leadership Breakfast and hear from a
past colleague and courageous leader,
Debbra Lindo, former superintendent
in Emery School District. Debbra
shared her Top 10 lessons learned,
which were thought-provoking and so
very powerful for those of us fortunate
to attend the breakfast and hear her
speak.
For those ready to learn, the symposium provided more opportunity than
any year I can think of in the past. I
would like to thank the planning team
and, in particular, Darryl Adams (a little
dab to the left, a little dab to the right),
Chris Adams and the entire ACSA
team for the incredible job they did to
make the 2016 ACSA Superintendents’
Symposium ground breaking.
Lastly, I want to thank our Executive
Director Wes Smith, who understands
as a leader the importance of allowing
your staff to take risks and experiment
to expand opportunities for learning. I
can’t wait to see what they will have
in store for us all next year!
– Tom Armelino