EdSource

State Education Policy

Legislative Analyst’s Office criticizes Newsom’s education budget for risky funding practices

LAO's alternative would cut increased spending to avoid delaying payments to districts in 2025-26.

John Fensterwald

Published

June 2, 2025

News in brief

• Tuesday, June 3, 2025 — 10:23 am

  Trump threatens to fine California for allowing transgender athlete to compete

• Tuesday, June 3, 2025 — 8:48 am

  Oakland Unified board names Denise Saddler interim superintendent

• Monday, June 2, 2025 — 9:54 am

  Modesto schools will provide free lunches, open to all kids this summer

Credit: State Senate Media Archive

Top Takeaways

• A drop in project state revenue projections from January to May, while avoiding cuts, would compound a dilemma.
• Newsom also would increase funding for early literacy and after-school programs.
• Key legislators share concern about draining the rainy day fund and deferring payments.

The Legislative Analyst’s Office is criticizing Gov. Gavin Newsom’s spending plan for next year for schools and community colleges. It says the May revision of the 2025-26 state budget would create new debt, rely on one-time funding to pay for ongoing operations, and drain the education rainy day fund to pay for new programs and enlarge existing ones.

The Legislature should reject the financially unsound practices, which would “put the state and districts behind the eight ball” if state revenues fall short of projections, Ken Kapphahn, senior fiscal and policy analyst for the LAO, told the Legislature’s budget committees on May 22. 

The LAO provides the Legislature with nonpartisan analysis and advice on fiscal and policy issues.

In his budget for 2025-26, Newsom would protect TK-12 and community colleges from a $4.4 billion drop in projected state revenue between his January and revised May budgets and add $2 billion in spending to the administration’s priorities, which include:

• Qualifying more students for coverage of summer and after-school learning through the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program ($526 million).
• Hiring more math and literacy coaches and training teachers in literacy instruction ($745 million). The money would reflect legislation that the Legislature is expected to pass requiring textbooks and instruction practices to incorporate phonics and foundational skills.
• Reducing the student-to-staff ratio in transitional kindergarten from 12 to 1 to 10 to 1 ($517 million).
• Paying stipends for student teachers ($100 million).

The biggest budget challenge is that the projected Proposition 98 guarantee for 2025-26 — the minimum portion of the state’s General Fund that must be spent on TK-12 and community colleges — fell $4.4 billion — from $118.9 billion in the initial budget in January to $114.5 billion in May — because of revised revenue forecasts for California that project a drop in stock market earnings and uncertain impacts from President Donald Trump’s economic policies.

Newsom’s May budget would include some cuts and savings from, for example, lower projected enrollment in transitional kindergarten. It would also withdraw or reduce nearly $400 million in community college funding for updating data systems and investing in Newsom’s Master Plan for Career Education (see Page 28 of his budget summary).

But he’d primarily rely on financial tactics that the LAO cited as fiscally risky and unwise:

• Committing $1.6 billion in one-time funding for ongoing funding, a strategy that could leave the state short of funding starting a year from now;
• Depleting the Prop. 98 rainy day fund by $1.5 billion;
• Issuing a $2.3 billion IOU by pushing back paying $1.8 billion for TK-12 and $532 million for community colleges from June 2026 to the next fiscal year in 2026-27. This deferral, though only for several weeks, creates a debt that must be repaid. Paying it off will eat into state revenue for districts and community colleges in the subsequent year. 

Issuing deferrals and digging into the state’s reserves have been done before during recessions and financial emergencies, but should be viewed as “a tool of last resort,” not as solutions to difficult spending choices, Kapphahn said. 

“The state historically has tried to contain spending during tight times to protect funding for core programs,” its critique said. “May Revision would task districts with hiring staff and expanding local programs based on funding levels that the state might be unable to sustain.”

Neither LAO nor Newsom is predicting a financial recession, but both project weakened state revenues over the next two years.

The LAO’s option

The LAO put forward an alternative budget that it claims would meet the revised, lower Prop. 98 minimum funding guarantee for 2025-26, including a required 2.3% cost-of-living adjustment for community colleges and schools. It would avoid deferrals, reduce $1.6 billion in ongoing spending, and reject many of Newsom’s one-time spending proposals, including literacy training and materials. 

Instead, consistent with local control, it would increase an existing discretionary block grant to let districts choose how to spend much less new money.

Negotiations in the coming weeks between Newsom and legislative leaders will determine what’s in the final budget. However, two Democratic leaders who chair budget committees overseeing education in the Assembly and Senate said they shared the LAO’s skepticism. 

Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, said he felt uncomfortable recommending increased funding for individual programs that “set us on for being in trouble next year.”

“If we do all this, and the projections are accurate,” he said at the May 22 hearing, “there will not be enough money to pay off deferrals and make the COLA. The decision to put us in that position we are making now, potentially creating a bad situation for next year.”

Assemblymember David Alvarez, D-San Diego, who chairs the Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, said he too is concerned that the proposed budget would deplete the last $1.5 billion of the rainy day fund, which was $8.4 billion only two years ago.

At the same time, he agrees with Newsom’s new spending on literacy instruction and funding for stipends for student teachers. And he would add in money for ethnic studies that Newsom didn’t include. Without the funding, the mandate for a semester-long ethnic studies course that the Legislature required, starting in 2025-26, cannot take effect.

Alvarez didn’t suggest budget cuts to make room for ethnic studies.

EdSource

EdSource

California schools prepare to introduce universal reading screening

Louis Freedberg

Published

May 20, 2025

The future of California higher education under Trump

Tuesday, May 20 at 3:00 p.m.

Register now

Credit: Alison Yin / EdSource

Top Takeaways

• By June 30, California schools must choose one of four screening tests recommended by a state panel. 
• Most other states already have a universal reading screening test for early grades, but California has lagged behind.
• West Contra Costa went through an intensive 18-month process before selecting mCLASS DIBELS as its screening test of choice.

After a decade-long push from reading advocates, California schools are on the verge of requiring every student in kindergarten through second grade to get a quick screening test to detect challenges that could get in the way of them becoming proficient in reading. 

Related Reading

State takes another step toward mandatory testing for reading difficulties in 2025

December 18, 2024

Under 2023 legislation, every school district in the state is required to select the screening test it prefers by June 30. They can choose from among four options recommended by a state panel — and then begin administering the test during the coming school year. 

California will be one of the few remaining states to introduce a universal screening test like this in K-2 grades. “This is something we have been fighting for for 10 years,” said Megan Potente, co-state director of Decoding Dyslexia CA. Her organization co-sponsored four prior bills, which did not make it through the state Legislature, until it was included in the 2023 education budget bill. 

The screening test had a powerful champion: Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Newsom was diagnosed with dyslexia in elementary school and still copes with it as governor. He has become a national spokesperson on the issue, even writing a children’s book about it, titled “Bill and Emma’s Big Hit.” 

Districts will only be required to administer the screening test in the K-2 grades, in part because substantial research shows that reading mastery by the third grade is crucial for a student’s later academic success. 

The screening test has assumed even greater urgency as California attempts to boost students’ reading abilities. The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress report showed that average reading scores in California and nationally have dipped below pre-pandemic levels.

The test is not intended to provide a definitive diagnosis of dyslexia or other reading difficulties. Instead, its goal is to be a guide for parents and teachers on whether further diagnosis is necessary and to prompt schools to provide other support services. 

However, Potente, a former teacher in San Francisco Unified, pointed out that the screening test could prevent students from being placed in special education classes unnecessarily. She said her 16-year-old son, who had reading difficulties, didn’t get any intervention until after the crucial third-grade milestone. 

“If we had caught his challenges earlier and addressed them with the intensive instruction that he got later, he would not have needed special education,” she said. 

“Screening is just the first step. How the districts respond to the needs of students is really what’s most important,” she said.

How West Contra Costa Unified decided

West Contra Costa Unified School District’s process for choosing what test to adopt offers a window into the intensive process that at least some districts have gone through. 

The 30,000-student district in the San Francisco Bay Area, serving large numbers of low-income and English learner students, first established a 20-member task force — made up of its superintendent, teachers, principals, board members, school psychologists, and community representatives — 18 months ago.

The district enlisted 150 teachers to try out mCLASS DIBELS and Multitudes, two of the four options offered by the state, and to provide detailed feedback.

After examining all of the information they received, district administrators recommended to the board of trustees at its May 14 meeting to select mCLASS DIBELS. (DIBELS, pronounced “dibbels,” is an acronym for Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills.) 

“mCLASS DIBELS was the overwhelming choice of our teachers,” Sonja Bell, the district’s director of curriculum instruction and development, told the board.

The screening test is already in widespread use in many districts, notably in Los Angeles Unified. It was developed by Amplify, a 25-year-old company that produces a range of testing and curriculum materials.

One feature that appealed to West Contra Costa teachers and parents is that the DIBELS test is quick — only taking between 1 and 7 minutes. Another plus is that it can be administered by the teacher while sitting with the student. The teacher can observe the student during the screening, which provides valuable information that might not be available if the test were taken on a computer or online. 

Another attractive feature was that DIBELS has a Spanish component called Lectura, which will be essential for assessing the reading skills of the district’s large English learner population. 

Among the many teachers already using the DIBELS test is Barbara Wenger, a second grade teacher at Nystrom Elementary in Hercules, one of several communities served by the district. The largest is the city of Richmond. 

Like many teachers in West Contra Costa and other districts around the state, Wenger has been using the test voluntarily before the task force was set up — sometimes administering it monthly to assess a student’s progress. “I can’t emphasize how important this is to our instruction,” she said. 

She recounted to the board at the May 14 meeting how DIBELS helped her identify a student who could only read four words a minute, instead of the expected 50 words. She put the student in an “intervention group” and gave her structured exercises. The student, she said, is now reading 104 words a minute, making it unnecessary to place her in a special education class. 

“This is something we could only have done by identifying her at the beginning,” she said. 

Having selected DIBELS as the screening test, the district will turn to a District Implementation Team to oversee a multiyear rollout plan. 

The district has decided to go beyond the once-a-year screening called for in the legislation and to administer it three times during the year to assess a student’s progress more regularly. A three-year professional development plan for teachers will be phased in. 

Crucially, the district says it will notify parents about the results of the screening shortly after it is administered. 

Multitudes, the test developed by the Dyslexia Center at UC San Francisco, received some support from teachers because it is also a one-on-one test, is free to school districts, and was created by well-regarded practitioners at UCSF. It will launch in both Spanish and English in the fall of 2025. But reviewers had concerns that Multitudes is only administered once a year and that teachers aren’t familiar with it. 

The district also ruled out the two other options recommended by the state, ROAR and Amira. In a report on its implementation plan, it said Amira was “the least preferred option because of concerns about its AI-driven design, lack of teacher-student interaction, and unreliable results for young students.”

Like many districts, West Contra Costa is already using i-Ready, a screening test for early readers. But the test was not on the list of the four approved by the state. In addition, there were concerns that i-Ready is an online assessment, and just accessing it electronically presents some challenges to students, especially incoming kindergartners. 

Nystrom Elementary’s Wenger said that i-Ready takes significantly more time to administer than DIBELS. i-Ready, she said, shows how far a student is from their grade level, which means it is less likely to flag kids in kindergarten who could benefit from intervention early on.

DIBELS also has a clearer way of communicating results to parents, Wenger said. i-Ready, by contrast, “has a very complicated, confusing, and ultimately overwhelming, report home.” 

Although supportive of the test, West Contra Costa board member Demetrio Gonzalez-Hoy expressed concern that the test would add to the testing burden students are already experiencing. “We have so many tests already,” he said. 

Bell, the director of curriculum instruction and development, reassured him that the DIBELS test is brief, and that teachers will be careful not to overtax students or push them beyond their ability. “They’ll stop when they see students have had enough,” she said.  

As part of its implementation, the district collaborated closely with GO Public Schools, an advocacy organization, to get broad community input, especially through the organization’s Community-Led Committee on Literacy. 

Natalie Walchuk, vice president of GO Public Schools and a former principal, said the process of choosing a screening test has become “a catalyst for meaningful instructional improvement” in the district. She praised the district for “going far beyond the minimal requirements” in the legislation.

EdSource

EdSOURCE

School Finance

No cuts for schools, more funding for early literacy in Newsom’s revised budget

The 3% cut to CSU and UC was smaller than the systems had expected, good news at an uncertain time

John Fensterwald, Diana Lambert, Emma Gallegos, Amy DiPierro, Karen D'Souza, Zaidee Stavely, And Michael Burke

Published

May 14, 2025

Gov. Gavin Newsom presents his revised 2025-26 state budget during a news conference in Sacramento on May 14, 2025.

Credit: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli

Top Takeaways

• Prop. 98 for schools and community colleges will be $4.3 billion less in 2025-26.
• Preventing cuts to TK-12 will require draining the rainy-day fund and deferring paying $1.8 billion next year.
• Districts will find the 2.3% COLA amid declining enrollment difficult to manage.
• UC and CSU had expected an 8% cut instead of the 3% it will get .

TK-12 schools and community colleges can expect the same funding in 2025-26 that they received this year, plus a small cost-of-living adjustment, and there will be a big boost for early literacy, Gov. Gavin Newsom revealed Wednesday in the revision to his January state budget plan.

Schools and community colleges will be shielded from the pain facing other state services because of the revised forecast of a $12 billion drop in state revenues that Newsom blamed on the “Trump slump” — the president’s erratic tariff and other economic policies that are affecting California.

For the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU), the news was better than anticipated. The systems would face a 3% cut for 2025-26, notably less than the nearly 8% reduction Newsom proposed in January. The smaller cut may provide some relief at a time when higher education leaders in California and across the nation are worried about losses in federal research grants and other funding under the Trump administration policies. 

The 2.3% cost-of-living adjustment in 2025-26 for community colleges and most TK-12 programs is determined by a federal formula that does not factor in the cost of housing, the biggest expense facing teachers and other employees.

In his May budget revision, Newsom keeps significant money for TK-12 programs that he proposed in January for fully rolling out transitional kindergarten for 4-year-olds, along with reducing the average student-to-adult ratio from 12:1 to 10:1 in every transitional kindergarten (TK) classroom, and for providing summer school and after-school learning to more districts.

An injection of money for early literacy

Newsom would also add $200 million to his earlier $543 million proposal for early literacy instruction, with money to buy instructional materials, hire literacy coaches and train teachers in “evidence-based literacy instruction,” which is code for teaching phonics and word decoding as well as other fundamental reading skills.

That funding would take a significant step toward creating and funding a comprehensive early literacy strategy and coincides with compromise legislation, pushed by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, on spelling out what the instruction and reading materials should look like.

“We’re thrilled. We’re excited,” said Marshall Tuck, CEO of EdVoice, a Sacramento-based nonprofit organization that co-sponsored early literacy legislation. “In a really tight budget year, prioritizing reading for California kids and investing $200 million is real leadership.”

Martha Hernandez, executive director of Californians Together, an organization that advocates for English learners, agreed. Funding for training on teaching reading and for universal screening in the early grades for reading challenges recognizes the unique needs of English learners, she said. “We are heartened by Gov. Newsom’s continued commitment to literacy, especially for our English learners.”

Newsom would also add to past efforts to recruit teachers by including $64.2 million in one-time funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, under which teachers receive college tuition in exchange for agreeing to teach in underserved districts and in subjects facing critical shortages, and $100 million to pay stipends to student teachers. Unpaid student teaching has been cited as one of the primary reasons teacher candidates fail to complete their credentials. 

He also would spend $15 million on a pilot program to redesign middle and high schools to better serve all students and create a network of districts to share what they learn.

The Legislature has a month to reshape Newsom’s budget before the June 15 constitutional deadline to pass a budget for the fiscal year that starts on July 1.

What the budget doesn’t include, however, is any funding to cover the potential loss of billions of federal dollars in Medi-Cal funding for school health services, cuts in Head Start, training grants for new teachers, and research grants for UC and CSU. He assailed the “assault on AmeriCorps — $400 million just whacked under the guise of ‘efficiency’ — and praised AmeriCorps volunteers who helped fire recovery efforts in Los Angeles and provide high-intensity tutoring in public schools.

“Our ability to backfill all these federal cuts — no, we’re not going to be in a position to do that, we just are not in that position,” Newsom said. “It’s the old adage, you can’t do everything, but you can do anything. There may be areas where we can make adjustments.”

As he had already indicated he would do, Newsom included no money to implement high school ethnic studies. Although the Legislature mandated in 2021 that every school provide the course, starting in fall 2025, there is no mandate without funding; districts can choose not to offer it.

In one cost-cutting measure, Newsom is proposing to roll back California’s health insurance program for undocumented immigrant adults, by charging premiums and freezing new enrollment, a move that advocates said will affect their children, many of whom are U.S. citizens. One in 10 California children is estimated to have an undocumented parent.

“When a parent or family member is sick and unable to work or provide care, kids suffer as a result,” said Mayra Alvarez, president of the nonprofit organization The Children’s Partnership.  “Ripping away these family members’ access to health care, while they are also under threat of cruel immigration enforcement and other anti-immigrant policies, in turn puts the well-being of our children at risk.”

Higher education

State funding for the state’s system of 116 community colleges would change little from last year, receiving 0.6% less, at $8.9 billion. However, some of its important funding — $531.6 million from Proposition 98 revenues — would be deferred for a year under the proposal.  

UC would have its funding cut by $129.7 million, while CSU would lose $143.8 million. In January, the Newsom administration had proposed deeper cuts of $396.6 million and $375.2 million, respectively. 

“It feels like we’ve gone from a five-alarm fire to something lesser than that. But we can’t call the emergency response off,” said Joshua Hagen, vice president of policy and advocacy for the Campaign for College Opportunity.

The revised budget maintains a proposal to defer previously promised 5% budget increases until 2027-28 for both systems. Those deferrals, which were part of Newsom’s multiyear compact agreements with the systems, were also included in Newsom’s January budget proposal. 

The compacts, originally agreed to in 2022, promised annual budget increases for UC and CSU in exchange for the systems working toward goals such as increasing graduation rates and enrolling more California residents. 

“We were able to hold strong to that over a two-year period. And we’re struggling now with some challenges,” Newsom said during a news conference Wednesday, though he added that the compacts are “sacrosanct” and that the systems would get their deferred dollars in 2027-28.

By reducing the proposed cut to UC’s budget for 2025-26, the 10-campus system will be able to minimize cuts to student support services and preserve “critical investments like affordable student housing construction,” President Michael V. Drake said Wednesday in a statement.

CSU Chancellor Mildred García warned in January that a nearly 8% state budget reduction would result in larger class sizes and fewer course offerings, hampering students’ prospects for graduating on time. With those cuts dialed back to 3%, García praised the May revision as a “thoughtful and measured approach to addressing the state’s fiscal challenges.”

Proposition 98 maneuvers

In total, the May revision proposes $45.7 billion for the state’s higher education institutions and the California Student Aid Commission.

The minimum funding for 2025-26 for Proposition 98, the formula that determines the portion of the general fund that must go to TK-12 and community colleges, would be $114.6 billion, down from $118.9 billion in 2024-25 because of shrinking state revenues.

Newsom proposes to make up the difference by shifting numbers around, depleting what was left in the Proposition 98 rainy day fund. Among other maneuvers, he would:

• Drain the remaining $540 million from a fund that was $8.4 billion only two years ago, when the state faced a fiscal crisis.
• Defer $1.8 billion that would be due to schools in June 2026 by a month, to July 2026. Schools should notice little difference, although the maneuver does create a state obligation that must be repaid.
• Withhold $1.3 billion due to schools and community colleges in 2024-25 in anticipation that the revenues for the rest of the year might come up short because of the further decline in state revenues.

This last maneuver grabbed the attention of the California School Boards Association, which filed a lawsuit last year over a related effort, still in litigation, and is threatening to do so again.

“Even in lean times, investing in public schools is California’s best economic strategy, so we cannot sidestep constitutional protections for public education nor underfund Prop 98 to offset shortfalls in other sections of the budget,” Association President Bettye Lusk said in a statement.

The immediate reaction to the budget proposal was positive, with some caveats.

“The bottom line is that amid a budget crisis, the governor is protecting every major investment in education,” said Kevin Gordon, president of Capitol Advisors, a consultant for school districts. “We want to make sure Prop 98 funding is accounted for. As long as that’s the case, there’s not much to complain about.”

Scott Moore, head of Kidango, a nonprofit that runs many Bay Area child care centers, praised the commitment to universal transitional kindergarten while criticizing Newsom’s decision to suspend a cost-of-living adjustment for child care providers for low-income children and freeze funding for emergency child care services for foster and homeless children. 

“We know that small class sizes and highly qualified teachers are two of the most important quality standards to ensure children benefit from pre-K. This budget invests wisely in TK,” he said. “The proposed cut to the COLA (cost of living increase) for child care providers must be restored. Now is the worst time to eliminate a small, but very much-needed and deserved COLA for those who take care of our youngest and most vulnerable children.”

EdSOURCE

EdSource

High-needs students

Wellness coaches take on youth mental health problem in rural California

Certified professionals tackle high levels of emotional distress and substance use among young people in far-flung communities.

What’s the latest?

• Wednesday, May 7, 2025 — 8:17 am

  Math fundamentals are key to building numeracy, study suggests

• Wednesday, May 7, 2025 — 8:17 am

  Record number of borrowers fall behind as student loan collection resumes 

• Tuesday, May 6, 2025 — 10:16 am

  Bill to automatically admit eligible graduates to CSU moves forward

Students work on homework during an after-school program in Chico, the largest city in Butte County. (File photo)

Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

Top Takeaways

• Students in rural areas fare much worse than those in urban areas in mental well-being because of poverty and geographic isolation.
• New certified wellness coaches focus on early intervention, to increase access to care.
• Between long wait lists and incomplete referrals, many students still do not receive the help they need on time.

At 14, Charlotte Peery dropped out of high school. 

“I was one of those silent sufferers,” Peery said. “I was battling with addiction, and once I finally decided I couldn’t go to school anymore, there wasn’t anyone around to say, ‘Well, let’s see what we can do’.” 

It took another four years for Peery, raised in rural Tehama County, to return to school and enroll in an alternative education program. There, she met a counselor who provided the academic guidance and mental health counseling she needed to graduate from high school. Peery has since started earning her bachelor’s degree in social work and has become one of Tehama County schools’ first certified wellness coaches. 

“When I had the opportunity to apply to be a wellness coach — it was everything I’ve always wanted to do — to provide the kind of support that I lacked when I needed it most,” Peery said.

As an entry-level wellness coach, Peery provides students with nonclinical support such as quick check-ins, screenings, referrals to specialists, structured mental health curriculum and outreach to their families. 

Peery’s role is part of the state’s $4.6 billion Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, for which the Department of Health Care Access and Information received $278 million to recruit, train and certify a diverse slate of mental health support personnel, known as certified wellness coaches, for schools and community-based organizations. Since February 2024, the department has hired over 2,000 certified wellness coaches. 

“The wellness coach program helped define what coping skills and home-to-school services I could focus on,” said Jacque Thomas, who serves as a certified wellness coach II and is able to provide more in-depth services to students, such as individual 30-minute sessions focused on coping skills, goal-setting and life skills. 

According to a 2021 study, 45% of California youth between the ages of 12 and 17 reported having struggled recently with mental health issues. The overall suicide rate in Tehama and neighboring counties is more than twice the state average, and according to a 2017-2019 survey, more than a third of 11th graders in Tehama County reported feelings of depression.  

Research shows that children ages 2 to 8 in rural communities consistently have higher rates of mental, behavioral and developmental disorders than children in urban communities, largely due to financial difficulties and geographic isolation. Students in Tehama County tend to start struggling with mental health issues at a younger age, said Savannah Kenyon, a parent to a fourth grader and an education behavior assistant at Red Bluff High School. 

“Our neighbors could be acres and acres away, and we don’t know them by name — so there’s a lot less socializing,” Kenyon said. “A lot of our students also come from a family of addiction or have to be the providers for their families.” 

In Tehama County, nearly 1 in 5 children, and a third of children under the age of 5, live below the poverty line. The county also ranks sixth in California for the number of children who have experienced two or more adverse childhood events, such as abuse, neglect, substance use or mental health problems, known to have lasting impacts on health and well-being. 

“It’s hard to see our children dealing with adult problems, and as a result, adult mental health problems, way younger,” Kenyon said. 

Wellness coaches like Thomas and Peery try to understand students’ needs as they evolve. Thomas said that in the past school year, they saw an increase in students referred for substance use intervention, mirroring troubling rates of adolescent drug use and fatalities in the U.S.

In response to the increase in referrals, Thomas and Peery decided to become trained in Mindfully Based Substance Abuse Treatment, a program focused on building emotional awareness and examining cravings and triggers in youth substance use. In the process, they also learned about students dealing with unhealthy relationships or domestic violence at home. In response, Peery developed and ran a 16-week curriculum in three schools and a juvenile detention center, teaching students how to identify and respond to issues like abuse and family trauma.  

Charlotte Peery, certified wellness coach I in Tehama County.

Peery is often the first point of contact for a student struggling with mental health issues. On paper, her job spans the next two or three steps in the process — a mental health screening, a mindfulness and stress reduction session, or a referral to a specialist. But in practice, she hopes to strengthen the long-term network of care available to students. She has partnered with the Tehama County Department of Behavioral Health, which provides substance use recovery treatment, and Empower Tehama, which helps victims of domestic violence, for example. 

“I’m making connections with drug and alcohol counselors and becoming more aware of which clinicians are accepting new clients once students transition out of our program,” Peery said. “To have that open communication, I’ve seen a huge shift in the way all of our partners are working together.” 

School-based support is likely the most effective way to reach Tehama County students in need, she said, because most families cannot easily access major services, in part due to a disproportionate shortage of mental health providers, 

“We’ve been able to provide more services to the farthest outreaches of our community and helped build rapport with every school,” Thomas said. “We go out to all 33 schools in the county to provide check-ins and open up the doors for our clinicians to meet with high-need students.” 

Early intervention matters 

After her daughter’s school shut down at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, just as she was starting transitional kindergarten, Kenyon noticed that her daughter was missing some key developmental milestones. 

“We were realizing that the kids were not socializing at some of their peak times when they should be learning social skills,” Kenyon said. “I knew at an early age that she was going to be struggling with her ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), so we knew that starting young was going to be the best way to help her in the long run.”

Early intervention for Kenyon’s daughter began with a screening and diagnosis of ADHD. From there, she said, her daughter’s counselor and teacher helped with little things like — motivating her through action-oriented feedback on her work, or teaching her mindful, deep breathing when she feels anxious — that allowed her daughter to handle emotional distress as well as social expression and inattentiveness in the classroom on a day-by-day basis.   

“We’re always having open communication with the counselor or teacher. Being able to tell them, ‘We struggled last night, so she might be a little tired today; she might be a little bit emotional,’ has been imperative to her success,” Kenyon said. 

Research shows that early, multidisciplinary interventions, such as a combination of school-based programs and family support initiatives, significantly reduce the risk of carrying mental health disorders into adulthood. 

School shutdowns during the pandemic compounded the youth mental health crisis in California. About 65% of young people with depression did not receive treatment during the pandemic, while the rate of suicide among adolescents rose by 20%. 

“We saw heightened anxiety, depression and delays in social development for students that had gone longer without intervention than they typically would have if they were on a school campus,” said JoNell Wallace, school mental health and wellness team coordinator at the Tehama County Department of Education. “We’re now starting interventions in third or fourth grade that we would’ve caught in second grade.” 

Jacque Thomas, certified wellness coach II in Tehama County.

Despite the additional support, Thomas said she has been flooded with students approaching her for help (“which is amazing,” she adds) and that students’ needs in Tehama County are still outpacing available staff and services at schools. She frequently eats in her car on the way to a counseling session, or sometimes skips lunch altogether, to fit another student into her schedule. 

 “You start to get stretched thin, and I don’t want any one student to have to be on a waitlist,” Thomas said.

Understaffing has also underscored the weaknesses of the referral system, a process through which schools assess students and refer them to wellness coaches, depending on the level of support they need. Schools do not always connect students to the support they need because of how time-consuming referrals can be.

“I think schools would much rather prefer it if we were on site,” Thomas said. “And that’s the goal — that more schools are qualified to have more wellness coaches, so their referral process will be in-house, and those services can start happening with a lesser barrier.”

There will be some relief starting this fall, when five additional certified wellness coaches will be placed at elementary and middle schools in Tehama County. Kenyon said the expanded service is a win for students like her daughter. 

“She used to hide under the table if she got any type of feedback or if she felt like she had done something wrong,” Kenyon said. “But she hasn’t done it this entire year, which is such a big change from how she would try and escape her feelings.”

Now, with help from her counselors, coaches and teachers, her daughter comes home excited to talk about her day, feeling more confident and self-assured. 

“Knowing that she’s coping, and for me to have help beyond just parental help — I know she’s a hundred percent supported through these programs,” Kenyon said.

EdSource