Compliance and reporting obligations in California public schools have increased significantly in recent years, undermining one of the core promises of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). While these requirements are intended to promote transparency, they also place a growing burden on school business officials and classified staff, consuming resources that could otherwise support students and classrooms.

Now, a new research initiative offers an opportunity to measure these burdens, quantify the cost in time and staffing, and potentially influence future education policy and legislation in California.

A Powerful Partnership to Understand the Problem

In a recent webinar hosted by CASBO, Chief Governmental Relations Officer Sara Pietrowski introduced the initiative, led by Jason Willis, Senior Policy Fellow at WestEd and public policy professor at the McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific. Willis is conducting a statewide study on compliance in California public education, as part of the Getting Down to Facts III project.

This is the third installment of the Getting Down to Facts series, a long-term research effort spearheaded by Dr. Susanna Loeb at Stanford University. The first edition, Getting Down to Facts I, played a critical role in the development and adoption of the LCFF. The second, Getting Down to Facts II, provided key insights on early implementation and governance challenges.

Now, Getting Down to Facts III, scheduled for release in Spring 2026, is exploring current policy issues in California’s K-12 system. Willis’ compliance study is a central part of that effort, and its success depends on strong participation from the field.

The Rising Tide of Compliance

Jason Willis presented compelling data showing a marked increase in compliance-related requirements over the past decade:

• Education Code expansion: Since 2015, there has been a dramatic increase in both page count and word count in the California Education Code, suggesting more rules and regulations for LEAs to interpret and implement.
• Resource codes in the California School Accounting Manual (CSAM): The number of state and federal resource codes, which reflect funding streams and associated compliance rules, has grown significantly since the LCFF’s adoption. This complexity increases workload for school business offices managing varied program requirements.
• Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP): Between the 2014–15 and 2024–25 school years, the length and complexity of the LCAP template and instructions have grown substantially. Willis noted:
  • 8x increase in the number of sentences
  • Nearly 5x increase in total words, characters, and polysyllabic vocabulary
    These increases translate to more staff time required to understand and complete planning documents.

Willis stressed that compliance is essential for public trust, legal compliance, and student protections. But when layered on without reflection or revision, it can overwhelm local agencies and erode the intended benefits of local control.

Why This Research Matters

This new study seeks to measure the time, effort, and cost of compliance across local educational agencies. It will provide, for the first time, quantifiable statewide data on the administrative burden faced by education leaders and support staff.

Pietrowski says this data is critical to informing meaningful dialogue with policymakers.

“We all know these activities require time and staff resources. But without the data, it’s difficult to argue for change. This research can help us do that.”

Willis echoed that sentiment, noting the potential for this study to influence state and legislative conversations.

“When we understand the scope of the burden, and where compliance adds value versus where it may not, we can begin to advocate for smarter, more efficient policy.”

The Survey: Your Voice Is Essential

At the heart of the study is a 20-minute survey. It is designed to gather information from education administrators and central office classified staff about:

• The types of compliance tasks they perform
• The time spent on specific reporting or data collection efforts
• The perceived value or redundancy of various requirements

The survey was piloted and refined with help from California school business professionals, ensuring it reflects real-world responsibilities and language.

Participants’ responses will be analyzed over the winter of 2025, with findings to be released in spring 2026 as part of Getting Down to Facts III.

Who Should Participate?

• Central office administrators (including CBOs and department heads)
• Classified staff who manage compliance, reporting, or data entry tasks
• Anyone with responsibility for state, federal, or local reporting and planning activities

Both large and small districts are encouraged to participate. Representation across regions, sizes, and student populations will help create a more accurate picture of the landscape.

What’s Next?

This is a rare opportunity to directly contribute to statewide research that could shape legislation. Pietrowski urged attendees to take the survey and share it with colleagues, especially those who may not be directly connected to organizations like CASBO, ACSA, or the California County Superintendents.

“We’ve never had this kind of data before. This is how we create the conditions for policy change—by showing what’s happening on the ground in every district office in the state.”

For more information about the study or to share feedback, reach out to Sara Pietrowski, CASBO’s Chief Governmental Relations Officer.