Panel weighs expanding ELOP to more districts; analysts urge stability for tier 2 funding

The Subcommittee heard proposals and critique on the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP). George Harris of the Department of Finance described the governor's plan to increase ELOP by $435 million and expand the pool of districts qualifying for tier‑1 (the higher per‑pupil rate) from districts with 75% unduplicated pupil counts to those with 55%, bringing total ongoing ELOP funding to $4.4 billion.

LAO analyst Dylan Ochsopolito recommended delaying any expansion for at least a year so districts can hire staff, arrange facilities and prepare program delivery. He also recommended structural changes for long-run efficiency: align ELOP funding with the After School Education and Safety (ACES) program to avoid duplication; move toward funding based on actual participation rather than district enrollment; and set a fixed tier‑2 rate to reduce year‑to‑year uncertainty. "We think the $435,000,000 is a reasonable estimate of expanding the tier 1 ELOP range down to 55%, but we do recommend delaying the implementation of these changes if they're adopted for at least a year," Ochsopolito said.

Why it matters: ELOP is California's primary state investment in before‑school, after‑school and summer learning for TK–6 students in high‑need districts. Committee members and stakeholders expressed concern that year-to-year rate volatility undermines local staffing and program stability, and that subtracting ACES funding from ELOP could penalize districts that successfully used both funding streams to expand access.

Key details and discussion: - Administration proposal: Increase ELOP by $435 million and lower the tier‑1 unduplicated threshold from 75% to 55% to expand universal access in higher‑need districts. - LAO recommendations: Delay implementation for one year (to allow planning/hiring); align ELOP and ACES to remove overlap or require districts to demonstrate increased participation if both fund sources are retained; transition to participation-based funding (enrollment/ADA) once statewide enrollment data collection is robust; consider a fixed tier‑2 rate to reduce uncertainty. - Department of Education: CDE noted practical challenges in ramping up programs; many small or previously nonparticipating districts needed time to staff and operate ELOP. CDE explained prior-year unspent funds were used in 2024–25 to bolster tier‑2 rates to $2,000 per ADA and that some districts that reported zero expenditures in early years have since started programs.

Stakeholder input and next steps: Public commenters representing after‑school advocates, county superintendents and small districts supported expanding ELOP but also urged stability for tier‑2 and stronger definitions of "access" and participation metrics. The committee held the item open for further follow-up and asked staff to work with LAO and CDE on implementation timing, data collection and tier‑2 stability.