Bill Text: CA SB463 | 2015-2016 | Regular Session | Amended

NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft

---

Bill Title: School climate: Safe and Supportive Schools Train the

Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)

Status: (Failed) 2016-11-30 - From Assembly without further action. [SB463 Detail]

Download: California-2015-SB463-Amended.html

---

BILL NUMBER: SB 463	AMENDED
	BILL TEXT

	AMENDED IN SENATE  APRIL 6, 2015

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Hancock

                        FEBRUARY 25, 2015

   An act to add Chapter 18.5 (commencing with Section 53320) to Part
28 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Education Code, relating to
school climate.



	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 463, as amended, Hancock. School climate: Safe and Supportive
Schools Train the Trainer Program.
   Existing law establishes a system of public elementary and
secondary schools in this state, and authorizes local educational
agencies throughout the state to provide instruction to pupils.
   This bill would establish the Safe and Supportive Schools Train
the Trainer Program. The bill, to the extent that one-time funding is
made available in the Budget Act of 2015, would require the State
Department of Education to apportion funds to a designated county
office of education, selected from applicant county offices of
education, that would be the fiduciary agent for the program. The
bill would require the designated county office of education to
consult with specified organizations and to be in charge of
establishing specific professional development activities that will
lead to statewide professional development support structures and a
network of trainers allowing for the development and expansion of the
Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports programs,
restorative justice, social and emotional learning, trauma-informed
practice, and cultural competency professional development in each
region of the state, as provided.
   The bill would require the Legislative Analyst's Office to review
the impacts of this professional development effort and report to the
Governor and the Legislature on or before June 30, 2019, on
specified aspects of this training. The bill would require that any
funding allocated for this program be expended on or before January
1, 2019.
   Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  SECTION 1.  The Legislature finds and declares all of the
following:
   (a) California schools issued more than  600,000 
 500,000  suspensions in the  2012-13 
 2013-14  school year.  Recent statistics indicate
that 20 percent of schoolage youth experience a functional or
significant behavior or mental health disorder. Studies estimate that
between 3.3 million and 10 million children in the United States
witness violence in their own homes each year. Children who have
experienced early, chronic trauma, such as family or community
violence, can develop emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and
relationship difficulties that can adversely affect their ability to
learn and function well in school. Exposure to trauma is associated
with a higher risk for school dropout, and in turn, dropping out of
school increases the risk of being imprisoned. Behavioral problems
among schoolage youth are associated with high rates of depression,
experiencing a traumatic or violent event, and other significant
homelife stresses. Unfortunately,   In California,
pupils of color are disproportionately subjected to out-of-school
suspensions. African American pupils are three times more likely to
be suspended than all other groups. Native Americans have the second
highest suspension rate in the state. Studies have also shown that
pupils of color are disciplined more harshly than other pupils 
 , resulting in serious, negative educational consequences.
Exclusionary   school removals cause a number of correlated
negative educational, economic, and social problems, including school
avoidance, incr   eased likelihood of dropping out, and
involvement with the juvenile justice system. This civil rights in
education crisis has come to be known as the school-to-prison
pipeline. 
    (b)     Unfortunately,  too many
youth, particularly pupils of color and other vulnerable groups of
pupils, such as foster youth, who have been subjected to significant
trauma are suspended from school each year.  For pupils with
these mental health concerns, the   The  American
Academy of Pediatrics has found that suspension can increase stress
and may predispose pupils to antisocial behavior and even suicidal
ideation. Psychologists have similarly found that disciplinary
exclusion policies can increase pupil shame, alienation, rejection,
and breaking of healthy adult bonds, thereby exacerbating negative
mental health outcomes for young people. Removing pupils from school
through disciplinary exclusion also increases the risk that they will
become victims of violent crime. 
   (b) 
    (c)  The local control funding formula identifies school
climate as a state priority. However, there are a number of school
districts in hard-to-serve locations in the state that do not have
access to, and are not served by, professionals who have training in
research-based, schoolwide strategies that can address pupil social,
emotional, and mental health learning needs. The demand for trainers
and training in these practices in California has exceeded the
supply. 
   (c) 
    (d)  Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and
Supports (SW-PBIS) programs, restorative justice, social and
emotional learning and trauma-informed practices have been shown to
address these needs while also significantly reducing suspension and
expulsion rates. 
   (d) 
    (e)  SW-PBIS can provide a comprehensive and
collaborative prevention and intervention framework for schools to
improve academic and behavioral outcomes for all pupils. Recent
research from Orange County has shown that in school districts where
SW-PBIS has been implemented there has been a 26-percent drop in
in-school suspensions, a 55-percent drop in out-of-school
suspensions, and a 30-percent drop in expulsions. Schools that have
established and maintained SW-PBIS systems with integrity have
teaching and learning environments that are less reactive, aversive,
punitive, dangerous, and exclusionary, are more engaging, responsive,
preventive, productive, and participatory, address classroom
management and disciplinary issues such as attendance, cooperation,
participation, and meeting positive expectations, improve support for
pupils whose behavior requires more specialized or intensive
assistance for emotional and behavioral disorders and mental health
issues, and maximize academic engagement and achievement for all
pupils. 
   (e) 
    (f)  Restorative justice or restorative practices are a
set of principles and practices grounded in the values of showing
respect, taking responsibility, and strengthening relationships. 
Restorative justice is a healing practice that both prevents and
responds to harmful behaviors.  When harm occurs at a
schoolsite, restorative justice focuses on repair of harm and
prevention of reoccurrence. Restorative practice, which builds upon
restorative justice and applies in the school context, is used to
build a sense of school community and resolve conflict by repairing
harm and restoring positive relationships through the use of regular
restorative circles where pupils and educators work together to set
academic goals, develop core values for the classroom community, and
resolve conflicts. Practices such as peacemaking circles and
restorative conferences are designed to help pupils take
responsibility for their actions and repair the harm they may have
caused. Through this process, pupils learn how to interact and manage
their relationships. A restorative justice approach enables school
personnel to intervene more effectively, increasing support without
compromising accountability.  At Richmond High School in West
Contra Costa Unified School District, a 2011 restorative school
discipline program cut the school's nearly 500 suspensions by January
2011 by one-half by January 2012.   A recent study
regarding implementation of restorative j  ustice in the
Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) from 2011-2014 found that,
among other things: (1) the discipline gap between white and African
American pupils   decreased significantly for OUSD pupils
who participated in restorative justice programs, but stayed the same
for pupils who did not participate in these programs, (2) there was
a 128-percent increase in the reading levels of 9th graders at OUSD
schools with restorative justice programs, compared to an 11-percent
increase in schools without such programs, and (3) four-year
graduation rates increased by 60 percent at OUSD's restorative
justice schools in the past three years, compared to 7 percent for
other schools.  
   (f) 
    (g)  Trauma-informed practices are strategies and
professional development for school staff integrated into a multitier
intervention and prevention framework to help increase school staff'
s understanding regarding the impact that trauma has on pupil
behavior and provide tools to address such behavior in a manner that
does not retraumatize the pupil, and to develop a multilevel
school-based prevention and intervention program for pupils with the
highest trauma needs. At El Dorado Elementary School, where UCSF
HEARTS -- Healthy Environments and Response to Trauma in Schools, a
trauma-informed practices model, has been in operation for four years
and where the school consistently tracked office discipline referral
data, staff reported a 32-percent decrease in such referrals and a
42-percent decrease in violent pupil incidents after the first year.

   (g) 
    (h)  Social and emotional learning (SEL), which is a
process that occurs through teaching in the classroom and
reinforcement throughout the schoolday to help pupils acquire and
effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary to
recognize and manage emotions, develop caring and concern for others,
make responsible decisions, establish positive relationships, and
handle challenging situations capably, has shown similar success. A
meta-analysis of 213 rigorous studies of SEL found that the academic
achievement scores of pupils receiving quality SEL instruction were
an average of 11 percentile points higher than pupils who did not
receive SEL instruction. In 2007-2008 in the Los Angeles Unified
School District, 58 percent of the model SEL schools showed 43
percent fewer discipline referrals, a 45-percent reduction in
physically aggressive behavior, a 64-percent reduction in disruptive
behavior, and at least 30 points of growth in academic performance.
An in-depth study found that pupils who received SEL instruction had
more positive attitudes about school and improved an average of 11
percentile points on standardized achievement tests compared to
pupils who did not receive that instruction. Secondary benefits of
SEL include improved graduation rates, reduced violence, and lowered
substance abuse. SEL is a tier one universal SW-PBIS strategy for all
pupils. 
   (h) 
    (i)  In order to ensure that all pupils flourish
academically, school districts must establish equitable discipline
practices and behavioral interventions that promote positive
social-emotional development and that prevent and respond to negative
behaviors in order to reengage disconnected pupils. School
psychologists, social workers, and mental health counselors play a
critical role in implementing school-based educationally related
counseling services and positive behavior systems and supports that
create and reinforce positive school cultures of achievement for all
pupils, including those at risk of academic failure. 
   (i) 
    (j)  The local control funding formula has been passed
in an effort to reform school finance and to direct funding directly
to at-risk pupil populations as outlined in Section 42238.07 of the
Education Code. This section states that the regulations shall
require a school district "to increase or improve services for
unduplicated pupils." Research shows that efforts to improve school
climate, safety, and learning are not separate endeavors. They must
be designed, funded, and implemented as a comprehensive schoolwide
approach. School districts must work to ensure through their local
control and accountability plans that pupils have access to
universal, targeted, and individualized psychological, behavioral,
and counseling services and support that will increase their chances
for academic improvement. 
   (j) 
    (k)  SW-PBIS, restorative justice, trauma-informed
practices, and SEL can support the local control and accountability
plan priority areas of school climate and pupil engagement by
providing local schools and school districts in hard-to-serve areas
with the research-based framework and strategies to produce targeted
pupil behavioral and academic outcomes. 
   (k) 
    (l)  Restorative practices, trauma-informed practices,
and social and emotional learning can be incorporated into the tiered
framework of SW-PBIS to help pupils gain critical social and
emotional skills, receive support to help transform trauma-related
responses, and create places where pupils can understand the impact
of their actions and develop meaningful consequences for repairing
harm to the school community.
  SEC. 2.  Chapter 18.5 (commencing with Section 53320) is added to
Part 28 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Education Code, to read:
      CHAPTER 18.5.  SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE SCHOOLS TRAIN THE TRAINER
PROGRAM


   53320.  (a) To the extent that one-time funding is made available
in the Budget Act of 2015, the department shall apportion funds to a
designated county office of education to be the fiduciary agent for
the Safe and Supportive Schools Train the Trainer Program. The
designated county office of education shall be chosen by the
Superintendent from county offices that apply for designation under
this chapter. The designated county office of education shall be in
charge of establishing specific professional development activities
that will lead to statewide professional development support
structures and a network of trainers allowing for the development and
expansion of the Schoolwide Positive Behavior Interventions and
Supports (SW-PBIS) programs, restorative justice, social and
emotional learning (SEL), trauma-informed practice, and cultural
competency professional development in each region of the state, with
a specific focus on those regions that are underserved and do not
have access to trainers in these research-based approaches.
   (b) The designated county office of education shall consult with
the Regional K-12 Student Mental Health Initiative, the National
Alliance on Mental Illness, the California Technical Assistance
Center on SW-PBIS,  the California Association of School
Psychologists,  the California County Superintendents
Educational Services Association, the California Mental Health
Directors Association, Collaborative for Academic, Social, and
Emotional Learning (CASEL), UCSF Healthy Environments and Response to
Trauma in Schools (HEARTS) project, Restorative Justice for Oakland
Youth,  the Restorative Schools Vision Project,  the
International Institute for Restorative Practices, and other
nonprofit and public agencies to effectively implement these
strategies throughout the state and nationally. The designated county
office of education shall also select an advisory committee made up
of stakeholders and professionals who have participated in the
development and expansion of these programs to assist in the planning
and implementation of this program.
   (c) Within the context of a state-level plan, funding shall be
targeted to all of the following critical activities:
   (1) Explaining the importance of linking research-based strategies
with local control funding formula planning and local control and
accountability plans, specifically with respect to the school climate
and pupil engagement state priority areas.
   (2) Creating regional conferences and workshops on implementation
that would provide free training for school and school district
teams.
   (3) Establishing stipends for release time for school personnel
attending these conferences.
   (4) Developing best practices of current district level systems
and ensuring that these best practices are widely disseminated.
   (5) Establishing a cohort of free or low-cost trainers and coaches
who can be available to work directly with local school districts in
hard-to-serve areas that are seeking to implement research-based
strategies.
   (6) Developing a network of educators who are effectively
implementing these practices and willing to provide coaching and
training to other schools and school districts, particularly in
hard-to-serve areas.
   (7) Developing statewide methods for collecting and disseminating
best practices in implementing research-based strategies.
   (8) Developing evaluation tools to measure the effectiveness of
research-based strategies.
   (9) Developing specific professional development and professional
learning communities for teachers utilizing these practices in their
classes.
   (d) The Legislative Analyst's Office shall review the impacts of
this professional development effort and shall report to the Governor
and the Legislature on or before June 30, 2019, on the breadth and
best practices of the training and any pupil outcomes impacted by
this training effort.
   (e) Any funding allocated for this program shall be expended on or
before January 1, 2019.