Improving American schools, and as a result, the educational leaders who guide and oversee American schools, has an historic background; yet research to accomplish the improvement is rooted in urban schools and male educational leaders, particularly the superintendent of schools. National and state leaders have used education policy as a means to improve student achievement for decades. California played a pivotal roll in the national trend for numerous years; most recently with the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) policy passed in 2013. The purpose of this study was to listen to the voices of female, rural superintendents as they implemented California’s Local Control Funding Formula policy. This qualitative study included nine participants from rural Local Education Agencies (LEAs) in Central and Northern California. Each participant participated in a 1-hour, semi-structured interview in her office. The researcher also observed each participant as they facilitated a meeting. The third piece of this triangulated research design included the review of each LEA’s Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP). All data were collected, analyzed, and coded to Grogan and Shakeshaft’s (2011) diverse collective leadership theory. This emerging theory identifies five themes through which women educational leaders generally lead: relational leadership, leadership for social justice, leadership for learning, spiritual leadership, and balanced leadership. Data from the interviews, observations, and LCAP indicate strong evidence supporting Grogan and Shakeshaft’s diverse collective leadership theory. All participants exhibited multiple data points in more than one of the leadership themes identified in the theory with relational leadership being the most pervasive followed by leadership for learning and social justice leadership. Both balanced and spiritual leadership had scant data points leading the researcher to question why. Further research in the areas of rural, female superintendents was recommended in addition to extensive research to support Grogan and Shakeshaft’s emerging theory. Particular attention to examining the presence or absence of balanced and spiritual leadership was also suggested.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) has introduced changes that alter the conditions under which educators, administrators, and community leaders approach their roles in the K-12 education system. Consequently, leaders at all levels may need to build the capacity--both the knowledge and skills and the resources--that they need to fulfill the potential of the new funding formula. This brief, the second in a series from the California Collaborative exploring LCFF implementation issues, highlights some of those capacity needs. Recognizing and addressing the demands for improved capacity at all levels of the system will be essential for achieving success with the new funding system. [Additional funding for the development of this brief was provided by the California Education Policy Fund, and the Silver Giving Foundation.].

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) represents a fundamental transformation of the way California allocates state funds to school districts and the ways the state expects districts to make decisions about (and report on) the use of these funds. This is the first in a series of short briefs that aims to capture some key themes emerging from the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) development process, including some of the key challenges that California educators still need to address as they work to fulfill the promise of the new funding system. This brief identifies some early lessons about how best to use the new system to meet student needs, especially the traditionally underserved. It highlights key areas that merit attention from California education stakeholders, as well as issues of communication around priorities and expectations that can help support the successful enactment of the new funding policy. [The development of this brief was also supported through contributions from the Silver Giving Foundation.].

The purpose of this study was to investigate school board relevancy in the 21st century through their behavior and decision making in the fiscal environment of California’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), specifically through the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), which consciously links student achievement and funding. The perception of school board presidents and community, as represented by the superintendents and DAC/DELAC Chairpersons, were explored through interviews of all three groups and review of school board meeting minutes and LCAP records to determine if perception and implementation coincided. Based on this research, school boards appear to be on the right path to implementing LCAP-related policies and goals, which have the potential to influence student learning and achievement in significant ways. However, data also suggest that the districts and charters studied possess differing levels of understanding of LCAP and LCFF and require additional education in the LCAP, as well as in their knowledge of effective teaching practices, the role of professional development in supporting student achievement, data, understanding goal measurements, and their role in supporting student achievement. The definitive test of school board relevance, as it applies to implementation of LCAP, requires allowing time for districts/charters to increasingly improve their development, implementation, and assessment of LCAP. Only politics and time will decide if LCFF, which supports research based practices for school policy and leadership, will continue on track to provide a mechanism solidifying school boards’ role in running public school systems, thus confirming their relevancy in the 21st century.

California educators continue in their struggle to communicate district plans to parents, teachers, and other members of the school community. Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs), have ballooned into jargon-laden stacks of tables, impenetrable to all but the most sophisticated reader. Envisioned as a tool to improve transparency, the LCAP as implemented has instead left many parents and community members utterly confused. In recognition of the LCAP's issues, state and district leaders are looking for better ways to inform the community about districts' plans and results. This brief, the fourth in a series informs district leaders as they communicate about their overall vision for school improvement, and the strategies and resource allocation decisions they are using to achieve that vision. It highlights insights that emerged from a November 2015 meeting of the California Collaborative on District Reform, in which participants reviewed resources already in use in the field--a sample of executive summaries, infographics, and other communication materials. As California continues to refine the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) system of policies and practices, these guidelines can help districts further the goals LCFF was designed to foster.

In 2013 California adopted a new funding formula that includes a significant reinvestment in public education after years of budget cuts. The new law allocates funds differently, directing more resources to students with higher needs and providing more local control and greater transparency. This revolutionary change presents California districts with the opportunity to fundamentally transform how they use resources. But with an influx of funds after years of budget cuts comes a temptation to simply reverse the cuts. This paper explores how districts can seize this moment to create systems that ensure all students reach new, higher standards. We argue that districts should: (1) Think strategically; (2) Think transformation; and (3) Think school leader empowerment. And we offer seven ideas for how districts can transform the way they use resources by connecting their people, time, and money to student and teacher needs.