Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to adopt a local control and accountability plan and requires the governing board of a school district to update its local control and accountability plan before July 1 of each year. Existing law requires a local control and accountability plan to include, among other things, a description of the annual goals to be achieved for each of the states delineated priorities, as specified, for all pupils and certain subgroups of pupils. Existing law includes school climate, as measured by certain factors, among the state priorities.

This bill would add to those factors the number of practicing school psychologists working on school climate issues. extent to which pupils have access to school psychologists or counselors to address issues including, but not limited to, mental health concerns, conflict resolution, and bullying.

To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Existing law requires the governing board of each school district to adopt a local control and accountability plan and requires the governing board of a school district to update its local control and accountability plan before July 1 of each year. Existing law requires a local control and accountability plan to include, among other things, a description of the annual goals to be achieved for each of the states delineated priorities, as specified, for all pupils and certain subgroups of pupils. Existing law includes school climate, as measured by certain factors, among the state priorities.

This bill would add to those factors the number of practicing school psychologists working on school climate issues.

To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

Date of Hearing: April 27, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2443

Author:(Baker) – As Amended AVer:April 21, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill adds student access to school psychologists or counselors to the indicators used to assess school climate for the purposes the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). Specifically, this bill requires local education agencies (LEAs) to assess student access to counselors that can address issues such as mental health concerns, conflict resolution and bullying.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Unknown Proposition 98/GF state mandated costs to for LEAs to measure the accessibility of school psychologists and school counselors. This bill does not specify how LEAs will determine whether a counselor or school psychologist is accessible to students to address issues such as mental health concerns, conflict resolution or bullying. Many districts conduct annual school climate surveys and could incorporate this issue into an existing survey. Other schools may need to develop a new tool for evaluation of this component of school climate. Actual costs will depend upon how LEAs chose to measure this component of school climate and the types of claims districts submit to the Commission on State Mandates to implement this measure.
2. Significant Proposition 98/GF cost pressures, in the millions of dollars, for the state to provide funding to support the hiring of additional school counselors and school psychologists. The ratio of students per counselor in this state averages 945: 1, compared to the national average of 477: 1, ranking California last in the nation. The current student per psychologist ratio is even larger at 1,321: 1. On average, counselors are paid $130,000 to $150,000 per year. Adding even one additional counselor could be a significant cost to a school district.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) was enacted to provide a more equitable distribution of education dollars—especially among districts with populations of low income pupils, English learners, and pupils in foster care—and to provide more local discretion over the use of those dollars. Accountability for the use of those dollars is achieved though the requirement to adopt and annually revise LCAPs. Each LCAP must address eight state priorities that include a mix of inputs (such as appropriate teacher assignment and level of parental involvement) and outputs (such as performance on academic assessments or English learner reclassification rates).
2. Purpose. One of the eight state priorities to be addressed by each LCAP is school climate, as measured by suspension rates; expulsion rates; and other measures, including surveys of pupils, parents, and teachers on the sense of safety and school connectedness. This bill expands the school climate priority under the LCAP to include access to school psychologists and counselors that address issues such as mental health concerns, conflict resolution, and bullying. According to the author, school counselors can fill a vital role in helping identify and address mental health issues. Mental health issues among students include depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, personality disorder, anxiety disorder, eating disorders, and alcohol/drug abuse. Measuring not only the number of available counselors and psychologists, but their ability to address these mental health issues, can be a key indicator of school climate.
3. Comments. School psychologists are only one of the many pupil support service personnel who work in schools to support the students' social, emotional, mental, behavioral, and physical needs.  The availability of an array of support personnel is an indication of a school's capacity to meet a wide range of student needs. Research shows that when students have greater access to supportive personnel, they are likely to have better school performance.
4. Opposition. The California School Boards Association opposes this bill. They state that while it is important that schools consider the mental health and school climate needs of students, including this component in the LCAP is premature. The State Board of Education is currently developing the rubrics that school districts will use under the eight state priorities, including the rubrics to determine school climate. It would be more appropriate to wait for the SBE to finish its work before adding additional components that may, or may not, conflict with the actions that school districts need to include in their LCAPS.

Analysis Prepared by: Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 13, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2443 (

Author:Baker) – As Introduced Ver:February 19, 2016

SUBJECT: Local control and accountability plans: state priorities: school climate: school psychologists

SUMMARY: Adds the number of practicing school psychologists working on school climate issues to the indicators used to assess school climate for purposes of Local Control and Accountability Plans.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires school district and county offices of education to adopt LCAPs and update them annually.
2. Requires each LCAP to address eight state priority areas, including school climate.
3. Requires school climate to be measured by all of the following, as applicable:
   1. Pupil suspension rates;
   2. Pupil expulsion rates; and
   3. Other measures, including surveys of pupils, parents, and teachers on the sense of safety and school connectedness.

FISCAL EFFECT: State mandated local program

COMMENTS: The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) was enacted to provide a more equitable distribution of education dollars—especially among districts with populations of low income pupils, English learners, and pupils in foster care—and to provide more local discretion over the use of those dollars. Accountability for the use of those dollars is achieved though the requirement to adopt and annually revise LCAPs. Each LCAP must address eight state priorities that include a mix of inputs (such as appropriate teacher assignment and level of parental involvement) and outputs (such as performance on academic assessments or English learner reclassification rates).

One of the eight state priorities to be addressed by each LCAP is school climate, as measured by suspension rates; expulsion rates; and other measures, including surveys of pupils, parents, and teachers on the sense of safety and school connectedness. This bill adds another measure of school climate: the number of practicing school psychologists working on school climate issues.

Student mental health issues. Information provided by the author's office indicates that, nationally, 6.3% of high school students report having made a suicide attempt in the past 12 months, and 26.1% report feeling sad or hopeless almost every day for two or more weeks in a row. According to the California Department of Education's (CDE's) Student Mental Health Policy Workgroup, suicide is the third leading cause of death for youth between the ages of 10 and 24. Mental health issues among students include depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, personality disorder, anxiety disorder, eating disorders, and alcohol/drug abuse. Few would question that mental health disorders among our youth is a serious concern and that schools provide a logical point of intervention. While this bill specifies only school psychologists, information provided by the author's office concludes that school counselors also can fill a vital role in helping to identify and address mental health issues.

Few would question that there is a shortage of school psychologists and counselors in California's schools relative to both the national average and recommended staffing levels. However, the number of psychologists in a school is not necessarily a useful measure of a school's climate. This is because the number of psychologists can be interpreted as either a positive or a negative indicator of school climate. Specifically, it could be a negative indicator if the school climate is poor enough to warrant additional psychologists. Alternatively, it could be a positive indicator if it reflects efforts by a school to maintain an already-positive school climate. To be useful, an indicator cannot be ambiguous. Also, while mental health issues among our your is a serious concern, the presence of pupils with mental health problems in a school is not necessarily related to school climate. Accordingly, in order to have a less ambiguous indicator and to strengthen the connection between school psychologists and counselors and school climate, staff recommends the bill be amended to, instead, add the following measure of school climate: "The extent to which pupils have access to school psychologists or counselors to address issues including, but not necessarily limited to, mental health concerns, conflict resolution, and bullying reduction."

Related legislation. Last year, both houses of the Legislature unanimously passed AB 580 (O'Donnell), which would have required the CDE to develop model referral protocols for voluntary use by schools to assist teachers and other school staff in recognizing potential mental health concerns and making timely referrals to appropriate support personnel. The Governor vetoed the bill with the following message:

I am returning Assembly Bill 580 without my signature.

This bill requires the California Department of Education to develop model referral protocols to address the appropriate and timely referral by school staff of students with mental health concerns.

California does not currently have specific model referral protocols for addressing student mental health as outlined by this bill. However, the California Department of Education recently received a grant from the federal Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration to identify and address critical student and family mental health needs.

It's premature to impose an additional and overly prescriptive requirement until the current efforts are completed and we can strategically target resources to best address student mental health.

In addition, AB 2246 (O'Donnell) requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to adopt policies for the prevention of student suicides, and requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to develop and maintain a model suicide prevention policy. This bill is currently pending in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Association of School Psychologists

Opposition

None received

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087