📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Alameda County Grand Jury • 2003-2004

City of Oakland Building Services Division - Payroll Processing

Published: July 07, 2004 40 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 8 findings

F1 Page 29
State and federal funding for special education is insufficient to cover special education costs in all 18 Alameda County districts. All districts spend substantial general education resources to cover the shortfall in special education funding.
F2 Page 29
Special education encroachment is putting substantial pressure on local resources and is threatening the financial viability of many districts.
F3 Page 29
In many cases, the magnitude of special education encroachment is the difference between financial health and the need for massive budget reductions and for external financial intervention. 28 2003-2004 ALAMEDA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT____________________________________________________ Education For example, if the Berkeley and Livermore districts were able to reduce just their special education encroachment by half, their budget deficits would disappear; their budgets would receive county approval, and they would no longer require county- appointed fiscal advisors. In HUSD, encroachment this year is about half the estimated operating deficit for next year. In OUSD, encroachment last year was approximately 2/3 of their operating deficit.
F4 Page 30
Shortfalls in special education funding must be covered from a district’s unrestricted general fund. This means reducing spending for non-special education students. When this shortfall is large, general fund resources are insufficient to avoid a conflict between both covering the shortfall and meeting obligations to all students. The point is not that special education funding is excessive to meet the needs of special education students. Even at present levels, special education funds may be seriously inadequate. The point is that where encroachment is substantial, it creates an unfortunate competition between special and general education programs for already scarce funds.
F5 Page 30
Districts are constrained in their ability to limit special education spending. Special education students are entitled to an “appropriate” education. Appropriate has come to mean appropriate regardless of cost. Even when districts prevail, legal costs to determine the limits of “appropriate” can be substantial. Districts must make calculated decisions weighing the cost of providing additional services vs. the costs of challenging the need for such services in legal proceedings. Federal “maintenance of effort” regulations, which generally require states and school districts to maintain special education spending at no less than the prior year level, further limit district efforts to reduce spending.
F6 Page 30
Given inadequate state and federal funding, encroachment cannot be eliminated. Districts should make efforts to make programs more cost effective. 29 2003-2004 ALAMEDA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT____________________________________________________ Education
F7 Page 31
Where state special education funds are allocated based on ADA (average daily attendance), declining enrollment affects special education, as well as overall funding levels. This does not appear to be well understood by school districts.
F8 Page 31
All students should be entitled to an “appropriate” education. FINAL OBSERVATIONS The importance of special education encroachment is not well understood by legislators or by the general public. Districts must work together to educate state and federal authorities as to the urgent need to adequately fund special education: for special education students, for general education students, and for the fiscal viability of school districts. Policy makers are all too accustomed to un-funded mandates. When such mandates seriously impact the adequate funding of public education, and create unfortunate conflicts in spending priorities between different groups of students, then much greater concern is warranted. An important guarantee of the IDEA, is that special education students are entitled to an “appropriate” education. Ultimately, all students should be entitled to an appropriate education. Unfortunately, most students have no such entitlement. School districts should work with their communities and their legislators to make this a reality. While many school districts complain of the impacts of encroachment, they do not routinely monitor its magnitude or its overall impact. Districts must pay specific attention to special education spending and to the impact of funding shortfalls on general unrestricted spending and on the district’s financial stability. 30 2003-2004 ALAMEDA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT____________________________________________________ Education In addition, while most districts understand the relation between declining enrollment and declining overall state revenue, some fail to clearly understand that declining enrollment results in reduced funding for special education as well. There is substantial variation in special education spending and encroachment from district to district. It is important for districts with substantial encroachment (e.g., Oakland and Berkeley) to investigate why their special education spending, and encroachment, is so high as compared with other districts. Finally, the Alameda County Office of Education, in its fiscal oversight role, should pay specific attention to special education encroachment in determining the current and prospective financial viability of the districts under its jurisdiction. 31 2003-2004 ALAMEDA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT____________________________________________________ Education ALAMEDA COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS: FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND FISCAL CRISIS INTRODUCTION In recent years, an excessive number of Alameda County school districts have been in serious financial difficulty. Grand Juries have investigated various aspects of this problem. The 2000- 2001 Grand Jury reported on Emeryville. The 2001-2002 Grand Jury reported that of the eight school districts in California in serious financial difficulty, three were located in Alameda County. The 2002-2003 Grand Jury investigated the Oakland crisis, which developed into the largest school system bankruptcy in California history, a $100 million state bailout, the imposition of a state-appointed Administrator, and the elimination of local control. By the end of the 2002-2003 Grand Jury term, Albany, Berkeley, Oakland, and Emeryville all had outside fiscal advisors appointed by the Alameda County Office of Education (ACOE) or state-appointed administrators. Shortly after the current 2003-2004 Grand Jury term began, the ACOE appointed additional fiscal advisors for the Hayward (HUSD) and Livermore (LVJU) districts, while removing the fiscal advisor in Albany. At present, four of the eight most financially troubled districts in the state (i.e., districts with “negative certifications”) are in Alameda County. To better understand why so many Alameda County school districts were in trouble, the 2003- 2004 Grand Jury undertook its own investigation. It again reviewed the fiscal oversight process and looked at the specific situations in both HUSD and LVJU. The Grand Jury reviewed numerous documents and met with officials from various school districts, the ACOE, and other state and county oversight agency representatives. The investigation found limitations in the current system of fiscal oversight, at least as practiced in Alameda County. The ACOE has a good record of taking decisive action once crises are 32 2003-2004 ALAMEDA COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT____________________________________________________ Education brought to its attention. However, the ACOE has done little to prevent financial crises from occurring in the first place. To be more effective, active oversight must occur much earlier in the process. At the very least, districts and their respective communities need to be made aware of serious problems in their districts as they arise. Effective fiscal oversight is only part of the issue. Unless adequate funding (federal, state, local) is provided, increasing numbers of school districts will be in severe fiscal crisis, no matter how well managed and no matter how effective the system of fiscal oversight.

Recommendations 4

Conclusions 33