Skip to main content
California Department of Education Logo

CASI July 2022 Charter Chat Resource Page

Information and resources from the July 2022 Charter Chat, presented by the Charter Authorizer Support Initiative (CASI).

Charter Chat Topics

  1. Legislative Updates
  2. Program Hot Topics
  3. Fiscal Hot Topics
  4. Q&A from Previous Charter Chats and CASI Email
  5. Q&A from the July Charter Chat


Legislative Updates (As of July 27, 2022)

  • Legislative Process Bills go through a two-year legislative process External link opens in new window or tab.. This is the last year for a bill to complete the process. Currently, the legislature is in recess for July and will return on August 1, 2022. All three of the bills listed below have passed their initial houses and are making their way through the other house.
  • Bill Updates Assembly Bill (AB) 2484 is currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee and has a hearing on August 1, 2022. AB 2774 is on the second reading on the Senate floor. Senate Bill (SB) 1343, is in the Assembly appropriations committee and is set for hearing on August 3, 2022. The last day to make it out of committee is August 12, 2022, and the last day for each house to pass bills is August 31, 2022.
    • AB 2774 External link opens in new window or tab. This bill would reconfigure the Local Control Funding Formula unduplicated count. Currently, students who qualify for free and reduced-priced meals, English learners, and homeless and foster youth are included in the unduplicated counts for supplemental and concentration funds. If AB 2774 is approved, students in the lowest academic performance category (Red on the California Schools Dashboard) for both English Language Arts and Math would also be identified for additional funding.
    • AB 2484 External link opens in new window or tab. This bill proposes that if a charter school closes, the district in which it is located would be responsible for the distribution of assets if there is no other entity available. The charter school would also have to update the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) prior to closure and report the number of displaced students to the California Department of Education (CDE). The bill would additionally impose new Charter School Facility Grant requirements regarding leasing property owned by a related party.
    • Senate Bill (SB) 1343 External link opens in new window or tab. This bill proposes that a charter school, authorized after January 1, 2023, would be required to participate in the State Teacher Retirement System (STRS) and/or the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS). The bill has been amended to exclude existing charter schools.
  • To follow current legislation at the California Legislative Information External link opens in new window or tab. website:
    • Under "Quick Bill Search," select either "Bill Number" or "Keyword(s)"
    • Enter the bill number or keyword, respectively
    • Once the desired bill is located, click "Add to My Favorites." This will prompt the user to create a profile and receive email updates on the status of the desired bill.

Return to Top


Program Hot Topics

  • Universal Prekindergarten The CDE plans to release updated Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Universal Prekindergarten (UPK) and Transitional Kindergarten (TK) and charter schools shortly. We will send updates via the CASI listserv. Please visit the CDE UPK Office Hours web page for additional information regarding upcoming technical assistance opportunities in August.
  • Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) All local educational agencies (LEAs) are required to submit an approved LCAP by July 1 each year to their authorizer and to the local county office of education (COE), unless the COE is the authorizer. The 2022–23 LCAP must follow the approved template and include the following items assembled into one document in the following order:
    • Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Budget Overview for Parents
      • Supplement to the Annual Update to the 2021–22 LCAP (the completed midyear update from this past February)
      • Plan Summary
      • Engaging Educational Partners
      • Goals and Actions
      • Increased or Improved Services for Foster Youth, English Learners, and Low-Income Students
      • Action Tables
      • Instructions

    If a school has been designated as Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI), make sure they have completed the CSI section of the LCAP. The budget and the LCAP are to be approved by the Governing Board at the same meeting by June 30. Additionally, the board must hold a public hearing to solicit feedback from the educational partners prior to the approval by the Board. See also the Charter Chat Q&A below.

  • Credentials for Charter Schools During the July Quarterly Training session, the San Diego County Office of Education shared information on credentials for charter schools. For more information and a copy of the session on July 22, please review the resources on the CASI Quarterly Regional Trainings web page.

Return to Top


Fiscal Hot Topics

  • Pupil Estimates for New or Significantly Expanding Charters (PENSEC) Reports are due by August 1, 2022, for the 2022–23 fiscal year. The PENSEC allows for new or expanding charters to receive advance apportionment funding based on the PENSEC and Charter 20-Day Attendance Report. See the CDE website for further details.
  • 45-Day Budget Revise Per EC 42127(h), all local educational agencies (LEAs) have the option/ability to file a revised budget 45 days after the Governor has signed the California Budget into law. This revision allows LEAs to start the fiscal year with accurate budget information based on significant changes to revenues and expenditures. Governor Newsom signed the California Budget on June 27, 2022. All 45-day revisions are due by August 13, 2022.
  • Classroom-Based Charter School Average Daily Attendance (ADA) Loss Mitigation Classroom-based charter schools are eligible for fiscal year 2021–22 COVID-19 attendance relief for both declining attendance rate and declining enrollment. If a classroom-based charter school’s 2019–20 attendance yield is greater than its 2021–22 attendance yield, then the 2021–22 attendance yield will be increased proportionately through a calculated adjustment factor, resulting in an increase to 2021–22 ADA. This ADA adjustment applies only to ADA used for LCFF funding purposes. Furthermore, with the one-time declining enrollment protection, a classroom-based charter school will receive an increase in LCFF funding equal to the difference between the adjusted 2021–22 COVID-19 Attendance Relief ADA and the 2020–21 ADA. The changes to ADA and LCFF funding entitlements resulting from implementing these COVID-19 hold harmless relief measures will be reflected in the 2022–23 First Principal Apportionment, which will be certified in February 2023. Calculation tools are provided below.
    • School Services of California Calculation Template – COVID-19 ADA Relief External link opens in new window or tab. (XLSX)
      Using data from the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) Calculator mv.23.1b:
      1. 2019–20 Attendance Yield Calculation
        • Reported ADA for 2019–20
        • California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS) Enrollment 2019–20
        • (1a) divided by (1b). Cap at 1.0
      2. 2021–22 Attendance Yield Calculation
        • Reported ADA for 2021–22
        • CBEDS Enrollment 2021–22
        • (2a) divided by (2b). Cap at 1.0
      3. Quotient
        • 2019–20 Attendance Yield
        • 2021–22 Attendance Yield
        • (3a) divided by (3b).
      4. If the Quotient is greater than 1.0, multiply the LEA’s 2021–22 fiscal year reported ADA by the Quotient.
    • Senate Bill 181 Section 123 Education Finance: education omnibus budget trailer bill External link opens in new window or tab.
      One-Time Declining Enrollment Protection Calculation:
      A. 2020–21 First Recertification “R-1” ADA
      B. 2021–22 Funded Second Principal Apportionment (“P-2”), AFTER COVID–19 Relief Adjustment
      C. If “A” is greater than “B”, compute the difference.
      D. Per-ADA Rate: Divide 2021–22 LCFF Base, Supplemental, Concentration Grants by 2021–22 “P-2”.
      E. Multiply “D. Per-ADA Rate” by “C. ADA Difference” for the one-time declining enrollment entitlement
  • Oversight Billing External link opens in new window or tab. A charter authorizing entity may charge a charter school for supervisorial oversight fees for the costs of performing the duties required by EC Section 47604.32. EC Section 47613 allows a charter authorizing entity to charge a charter school for the actual costs of supervisorial oversight, not to exceed 1 percent of the revenue of the charter school. However, if the charter authorizing entity provides substantially rent-free facilities for use by the charter school, the charter authorizing entity may charge for the actual costs of supervisorial oversight, not to exceed 3 percent of the revenue of the charter school. For purposes of calculating the oversight fee, revenue is defined as general-purpose entitlement and categorical block grant funding.

Return to Top


Q&A from Previous Charter Chats and CASI Email

Do charter schools need a board resolution for sufficiency under Williams?

California Education Code Section 1240, as revised by Assembly Bill 599, does not require board resolutions for sufficiency for charter schools to address requirements under the Williams Case. The determination of whether or not a board resolution is beneficial for demonstration of sufficiency is a local decision to be made by charter schools, chartering authorizers, and county offices of education conducting monitoring.

In Williams, what roles do the authorizer and charter school play?

Charter schools are now eligible for review under the Williams Act. If a charter school has been identified as Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) or Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI), they will be subject to Williams review. Also, charter schools in which 15 percent or more of the teachers do not possess a valid and clear or preliminary teaching credential will also be identified for Williams review. While you as an authorizer may not need to perform the Williams review (as that falls on the county office of education [COE]), you should still be aware of which of your charter schools will be reviewed. Williams reviews cover the following: sufficiency of instructional materials, credential reviews, and facilities reviews for charter schools.  For non-charter schools, copies of the Williams Uniform Complaint Procedures must also be in every classroom. Charter schools will need to prepare and make sure they can provide the information their COE needs to complete the Williams monitoring visit. This visit will take place within the first 20 days of school. The visit may be announced or unannounced. Once the visit is completed, the COE will create a report regarding the findings at each of the schools and how or if those findings were corrected. More information regarding Williams monitoring can be found at Williams Case - Monitoring.

For schools with questions or concerns regarding their placement on the Williams Monitoring List, please contact the Analysis, Measurement and Accountability Reporting Division at LCFFESSAdata@cde.ca.gov.

What constitutes an "Abuse of Discretion"?

Abuse of discretion is a legal term of art. In the world of charter school appeals, the charter school may appeal to the State Board of Education (SBE) for review of their appeal of denial based on an abuse of discretion by the previous reviewer. Per the SBE’s June 2022 Information Memoranda Charter School Appeals to the California SBE: Abuse of Discretion Review Standard (DOCX):

Abuse of Discretion Review Standard

Pursuant to [California Education Code] EC Section 47605(k)(2)(E), the “abuse of discretion” review standard is mandated for an appeal of a petition to establish a new charter school that has been denied by the governing board of a school district and a county board of education. Also, pursuant to EC Section 47607.5, the abuse of discretion review standard is mandated for an appeal of a petition to renew a charter school that has been denied by either a school district governing board or a county board of education. The SBE can only overturn the local decision when it determines there was an abuse of discretion, pursuant to EC Section 47605. This review standard does not apply to an appeal of a petition to renew an SBE-authorized charter school that has been denied by a school district governing board.

What is an “Abuse of Discretion”?

Abuse of discretion is the most deferential standard of review, meaning that the SBE is required to give deference to the decision of the school district governing board and county board of education to deny the petition. The SBE’s review is limited to a determination of whether the district governing board’s or county board’s decision to deny the charter petitioner “was arbitrary, capricious, entirely lacking in evidentiary support, unlawful, or procedurally unfair” (California School Boards Association v. State Board of Education [2010] 186 Cal. App. 4th 1298, 1313-1314).

The SBE had its first abuse of discretion case in July and the second is coming to the Advisory Commission on Charter Schools (ACCS) and the SBE in August and September, respectively. More information is available in Agenda Item 17 (DOCX) on the SBE July 13–14, 2022, Meeting Agenda.

Return to Top

Q&A from the July Charter Chat

Does Abuse of Discretion apply to revocation?

No. For further guidance regarding the process for revocation, see Education Code 47607 and California Code of Regulations, Title 5 (5 CCR), sections 11968.5.1–11968.5.5. Section 11968.5.1 provides the process for revocation of a State Board of Education-authorized charter, and sections 11968.2–11968.5 covers the process of charter revocation by a chartering authority and the appeal process.

Can a charter use its Local Control and Accountability Plans (LCAP) as its Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA)?

Charter schools may use the LCAP to serve as the SPSA, provided that the LCAP meets federal school planning requirements and the stakeholder requirements established in subdivision (a) of Section 52062, and is adopted at a public hearing pursuant to Section 52062 or 47606.5, as applicable.

What role does the California Department of Education (CDE) play if a Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) is incomplete?

The CDE works with State Board of Education-authorized charter schools on their LCAPs.

If a county office of education (COE) says a Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) is incomplete or suggests revisions, does the school have to present a new LCAP for local Governing Board approval?

Authorizers and/or COEs do not approve charter school LCAPs; LCAPS are approved by the Charter School Board.  However, if an authorizer or COE provides information regarding the LCAP completeness or suggests revisions and the Charter School chooses to revise its LCAP, then the Charter School Board must approve the revised LCAP.

Return to Top

Return to Monthly Charter Chats

Return to Charter Authorizer Support Initiative

Questions:   Charter Authorizer Support Initiative | CASI@cde.ca.gov | 916-322-6029
Last Reviewed: Tuesday, September 13, 2022
Recently Posted in Charter Schools