Latest
News
April 16, 2008 - School Services of California and Axiom announce partnership
Click here to read the article
February 1, 2008 - Axiom launches long-awaited Summary School™ v1.0
Summary School v1.0 is a powerful web-based application which enables districts and school sites the ability to make endless comparisons with other schools on a variety of demographic and achievement parameters to enhance their students’ performance.
Key features include:
Intuitive search page easily generates reports using a simple step-by-step approach
First-ever "similar kids, different results" comparative groups
Straight-forward navigation and logical layout design allow for quick comparisons
State-of-the-art report keyword search features and more....
February 1, 2008 - Axiom launches much anticipated SPSABuilder™ v1.0
SPSABuilder™ is an easy-to-use, web-based application for dynamic Single Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) creation. SPSABuilder™ makes continuous monitoring and improvement of school and student achievement goals, effortless. SPSABuilder™ couples the power of the Internet with facts and figures found in hundreds of reports made available from complimentary access to Summary School™. The SPSA is displayed in real-time, on the web and printable with just one-click.
CSBA,
Partners Win Reimbursement Fight for School Districts
and Local Government Agencies
(March 2007)
WEST SACRAMENTO – The California
School Boards Association announced a victory
in the legal battle to ensure that school districts
and other local governments are properly reimbursed
by the state for costs associated with implementing
state-mandated programs. The Superior Court of
California has ruled that while it has always
been the case that mandates added by the voters
through a ballot measure are not reimbursable,
the Legislature’s attempt in AB 138 (2005)
to add mandates imposed by the Legislature under
the guise of being "necessary to implement"
or "reasonably within the scope of"
an expressly stated voter approved mandate, was
unconstitutional. Thus, under AB 138 mandates
added by legislation – in programs such
as the School Accountability Report Card, the
Mandate Reimbursement Process, and certain Brown
Act requirements – would not be reimbursable
either.
"AB 138 clearly was part of an overall state
strategy to avoid reimbursing local governments,
including school districts, for the cost of implementing
mandated state programs," said Dr. Kathy
Kinley, president of CSBA. "For that reason,
we are very gratified by the Superior Court’s
decision."
The court also agreed with CSBA’s contention
that the state could not retroactively avoid paying
for mandates by changing the law after the Commission
on State Mandates had found that the mandates
were reimbursable, finding that the Legislature’s
attempt to dictate to the Commission is a violation
of the separate powers doctrine. Local governments
rely on the Commission’s decisions regarding
the extent of the reimbursements that would eventually
be received from the state.
"This decision is a great victory for California
public schools," said Scott P. Plotkin, executive
director of CSBA. "We are hopeful that this
decision will help convince state lawmakers that
accountability and funding really do go hand-in-hand."
The suit against AB 138 was filed by CSBA’s
Education Legal Alliance, joined by Sweetwater
Union High School District, the City of Newport
Beach, Fresno County, and Los Angeles County.
California
School Boards Association Suit Contests State
Decision to Not Reimburse Local Government
(September 15,
2006)
WEST SACRAMENTO — The
California School Boards Association and its Education
Legal Alliance filed a lawsuit last week in the
Sacramento Superior Court to dispute efforts by
the State of California to circumvent its constitutional
obligation to reimburse local governments for
activities it mandates upon them.
Other parties to the suit, also filed against
the Commission on State Mandates and Controller
Steve Westly, are the Sweetwater Union High School
District, the County of Fresno, the City of Newport
Beach, and the County of Los Angeles.
"This is a blatant effort by state government
to avoid its constitutional obligation to reimburse
schools, cities and counties for state-mandated
programs," said Scott P. Plotkin, executive
director of the CSBA. "Local governments,
and especially schools, are being hung out to
dry by the state when it refuses to cover the
costs for programs or operations it requires.
It's beyond me how the state feels it can simply
enact legislation that allows it to forego these
constitutionally mandated reimbursements. In enacting
AB 138, the Legislature has asserted the power
to categorically exclude reimbursement."
In 1979, voters approved Proposition 4, which
sought to prevent the state from forcing programs
on local governments without paying for them.
The Commission on State Mandates is the entity
charged with determining which legislation constitutes
a state mandate and how much will be reimbursed
to local agencies. Historically, the Commission
maintained that three state-mandated programs
were reimbursable mandates: (1) the School Accountability
Report Card; (2) the Mandate Reimbursement Process;
and (3) certain Brown Act requirements. However,
in 2005, the legislature passed and the governor
signed AB 138, which required the Commission to
either vacate or reconsider its prior decisions.
In accordance with this new regulation, the Commission
on Mandates has reversed and set aside its prior
determinations in the three claim areas that are
the basis of this litigation.
"AB 138, from whatever angle you examine
it, is wrong," Plotkin said. "Instead
of tearing down walls in our bureaucratic structure,
it builds new ones. The state must be held accountable
when it puts local entities in a financial bind
– there is just no other way to look at
it."
For more information or to schedule an interview,
please contact Ioannis Kazanis at
(916) 669-3244.
SIA
and Axiom Jointly Announce Settlement
(August 2006)
"SIA and Axiom today jointly announce the
settlement and dismissal of the lawsuit filed
by Axiom last year. Through this settlement neither
side admits any wrongdoing or liability, nor has
either side substantially changed its business
practices. The settlement reflects the parties'
mutual desire to end the cost of litigation such
that they may better direct their resources at
serving the school district of California. The
parties have also agreed that they shall make
no further statements regarding the allegations
in the lawsuit or the settlement other than this
joint statement."
Truancy
Hunter™ is featured in the San Mateo Daily
Journal (May 2006)
Less
absences could mean big bucks (by Heather
Murtagh, The Daily Journal)
Save
SARC Reimbursement? (January
2006)
Sacramento, California
- January 20, 2006 – In their continued
efforts to actively reduce or eliminate their
financial obligations to school districts related
to mandate reimbursement claims, the Commission
on State Mandates (COSM) has re-evaluated their
nearly eight-year-old decision on SARC reimbursement.
Axiom anticipates on January 26, 2006, the COSM
will eliminate SARC as a mandate-reimbursable
program. Therefore, school districts will no longer
be able to recoup their costs related to the preparation
and distribution of their SARCs. In addition,
this will eliminate Axiom’s ability to offer
a reimbursable product.
The argument that COSM has used to arrive at
their decision goes back to the origination of
the SARC from Proposition 98. The COSM now believes
that when California’s voters passed Proposition
98 in 1988, they required a simple, “but
not limited to” 13-component SARC. The state’s
new argument is the voter’s intention was
never to limit the SARC to just the original 13
components.
This rationale leads to the overturning of their
original 1998 ruling that the SARC is a mandate
reimbursable program. In 1998, the COSM accepted
a test claim that sought reimbursement for the
legislature’s additions to the SARC since
Prop 98 (1993-1997). The COSM declared the additional
portion of the SARC a mandate-reimbursable program.
Not only has the state now eliminated the SARC
as a mandate, the decision was made to go retroactive
back to January 1, 2005, ending the reimbursement
opportunity from this date forward. For SARC costs
incurred on or before January 1, 2005, claims
will be honored as submitted. As always, the State
Controller reserves the right to audit all claims
for thoroughness and accuracy.
The SARC has grown tremendously over the last
few years with the addition of the NCLB, Williams,
and the latest SB 687 requirements. Even though
the number of required components has increased
significantly over the years, Axiom’s prices
have actually been reduced. It is through the
constant refining of our processes and our reliance
on the newest technology that we have been able
to stay ahead of the SARC game. Unfortunately,
this may not remain the case for long if the SARC
requirements continue to grow at the rate they
have previously.
Just because the COSM has concluded that SARC
is no longer reimbursable doesn’t make it
right. Axiom is seeking feedback from our clients
regarding the state’s decision to make SARC
non-reimbursable. As it stands now, the state
can freely impose endless new SARC requirements
on districts without bearing any financial burden.
Are you willing to accept the state’s decision?
Would you like CSBA to consider fighting the state
on this decision?
To send us your feedback, please email sales@axiomadvisors.net
SARC
News (September
2005)
Grading
the Report Card: A Report on the Readability of
the School Accountability Report Card (SARC)
(UCLA's Institute for Democracy, Education,
& Access)
Axiom's
New Headquarters (May
2005)

Axiom is expanding! We've moved
our headquarters in Sacramento to 2440 Gold River
Road, Suite 200, Gold River, CA 95670. The new
office is 50% larger than our last facility, which
we'd occupied for the past 5 years.
(updated on September 18, 2006) |