LEAs must disclose egregious misconduct under new law LEAs are being encouraged to update hiring procedures following a new law that took effect Jan. 1. According to a recent client news brief from the law firm Lozano Smith, Assembly Bill 2534 introduces important changes to the hiring process for certificated staff within California’s public educational institutions. School districts, county offices of education, charter schools and state special schools will now be given expanded access to information regarding reports of applicants’ previous egregious misconduct directly from previous educational employers rather than waiting for the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to complete its reporting process.

Egregious misconduct, which serves as grounds for termination of certificated employees, is defined in Education Code section 44932 and includes specified sex offenses, child abuse or neglect, and controlled substance violations. Educational agencies, including school districts, county offices of education, charter schools, and state special schools are required to report any change in employment status of a certificated employee as a result of allegations of misconduct, or while allegations of misconduct are pending, to the CTC within 30 days of the final action (e.g., termination or resignation, among other things.) Upon receipt of such a report, the CTC conducts an investigation to assess whether any adverse action should be taken against the employee’s credential(s). This process can take anywhere from six months to a year, leaving time for the former employee to apply to other LEAs while the CTC’s investigation is pending.

Under existing law, LEAs (excluding state special schools) that reported a certificated employee’s egregious misconduct to the CTC are only required to report this fact to prospective public school employers upon request from the hiring LEA. And, information about a candidate or employee’s egregious misconduct can only be accessed through the CTC once it completes its internal review and recommendation process.

Beginning Jan. 1, 2025, applicants for certificated positions will be required to provide a complete list of every LEA they have previously worked for, and the hiring LEA must inquire to the listed LEAs about any credible complaints of, substantiated investigations into, or discipline for egregious misconduct by the applicant reported to CTC. The responding LEA must provide a copy of all relevant information within its possession that was reported to the CTC.

Find more information, including suggested actions for LEAs, at www.lozanosmith.com/news-clientnewsbriefdetail.php?news_id=3359.

SBE approves LCAP template for unexpended LREBG funds The State Board of Education has adopted revised Local Control and Accountability Plan template instructions that include unexpended Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant (LREBG) funds, as required by the Cayla J. lawsuit and subsequent budget action.

The changes, which were supported by ACSA and a broad coalition of education management and equity groups, provide a flexible approach that respects the diverse needs of LEAs by allowing them to integrate LREBG actions into their existing LCAPs.

“This flexibility is essential for LEAs to be able to align their specific contexts and operational needs to the LREBG while supporting their strategic objectives in the LCAP,” wrote ACSA Legislative Advocate Diana Vu in a letter to the state board. “This is especially important because the change will occur in the middle of the three-year LCAP cycle.”

The instructions will be used for unexpended LREBG funds in the 2025-26, 2026-27, and 2027-28 LCAP years.

In other business, the state board has delayed action on plans to update level descriptions on the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress.

Currently, student test results are categorized into four levels: Standard Not Met, Standard Nearly Met, Standard Met and Standard Exceeded. The California Department of Education recommended revising the reporting achievement level descriptors to “inconsistent,” “foundational,” “proficient” and “advanced.”

At the November state board meeting, education partners expressed concerns about the lack of community outreach with the change in level descriptors and the potential confusion it may cause, which triggered a robust board discussion.

The consensus was that the board members were generally supportive of the change but believed more time was needed to ensure all education partners’ feedback was included in the process. As a result, the board decided to delay action to approve the level descriptor change until January for CDE to gather additional input.