URGENT UPDATE: California schools are on the brink of a significant funding debate as new reports challenge the proposed shift from attendance-based to enrollment-based funding. This change could inject an extra $6 billion annually into K-12 education, but experts warn it may have serious consequences for student attendance rates.
Officials from the Legislative Analyst’s Office released a report on Tuesday, highlighting that while switching to enrollment-based funding is backed by 45 other states, it risks diminishing schools’ motivation to encourage daily attendance. The report suggests that without a financial incentive to boost attendance, schools may see a decline in student numbers, ultimately hurting educational outcomes.
California has traditionally funded schools based on average daily attendance, a model that has been in place for over a century. The report emphasizes that this funding approach has proven effective; a pilot study from the 1980s showed a 5.4% increase in high school attendance and a 3.1% increase in elementary schools where financial rewards were tied to daily attendance.
Despite some improvements since pandemic-related closures, attendance rates remain troublingly low. In 2019, nearly 96% of students were attending school daily, but this number plummeted to 90% during the COVID-19 pandemic and has not fully recovered. Current attendance levels are still approximately 2% below pre-pandemic rates.
Hedy Chang, president of the nonprofit organization Attendance Works, remarked,
“It’s a thoughtful analysis that weighs the pros and cons. For some districts, there might be benefits to a funding switch, but it also helps when districts have a concrete incentive for encouraging kids to show up.”
The report also stresses that attendance is closely linked to student success, with better attendance correlating to higher test scores and graduation rates. Schools with high rates of absenteeism often serve vulnerable populations, including students in foster care and English learners, who may require additional support.
The ongoing discussion about funding formulas gained traction during a recent conference of the California School Boards Association. At this conference, educators voiced concerns that the current funding model does not adequately address the costs of educating students with high needs.
A recent bill by former state senator Anthony Portantino aimed to initiate a change in the funding formula but ultimately resulted in a request for further study from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, which passed in 2024.
Despite the potential for increased funding, experts like Troy Flint, spokesman for the California School Boards Association, caution that simply switching to enrollment-based funding could exacerbate existing issues. Schools with lower attendance, often located in disadvantaged neighborhoods, would receive less funding under this model, compounding their challenges.
Flint stated,
“It just compounds the problem, creating a vicious cycle. To really boost attendance, schools need extra funding to serve those students.”
Currently, California’s schools receive about $15,000 per student from the state’s Local Control Funding Formula, with an additional $7,000 from federal and other sources, totaling over $100 billion last year. However, the need for a more equitable funding approach is clear.
As the debate unfolds, schools are left grappling with the implications of these potential changes. The urgency of this situation cannot be overstated, as California’s education system faces critical decisions that will impact the future of millions of students.
WHAT’S NEXT: Watch for developments as lawmakers consider the findings of the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Schools and advocates continue to push for a funding strategy that prioritizes both enrollment and attendance, ensuring that all students receive the support they need to succeed.
