What the Next California Superintendent of Public Instruction Means for Your Expanded Learning Program

The person who wins the 2026 race for California Superintendent of Public Instruction will have more direct influence over your ELOP, ASES, and 21st CCLC programs than almost any other elected official in the state. They will lead the California Department of Education (CDE), set compliance guidance, convene the working groups that shape policy, and carry your programs into budget negotiations with the Governor’s office.

Time to move this race closer.

Why This Office Has Real Operational Consequences

The SPI oversees CDE, which administers every major California expanded learning program: ELOP, ASES, 21st CCLC, and ASSETs. The SPI’s office writes the compliance guidance your coordinators work from, determines how frequently CDE monitors programs, and decides whether expanded learning gets a dedicated policy unit or gets folded into a broader division.

The scale is not abstract. California’s ELOP appropriation now sits at roughly $4.6 billion after the 2025-26 Budget Act’s expansion, with the UPP threshold for Rate 1 funding lowered from 75% to 55% to extend higher per-pupil rates to far more LEAs. Separately, SB 153 created a new Attendance Recovery pathway that lets districts recoup ADA through structured non-school-hours instruction — an authority that now intersects directly with your expanded learning operations.

The next SPI will inherit ELOP at its most complex point to date. What CDE prioritizes will show up in your compliance workload, your audit exposure, and your budget projections.

Four Policy Areas to Watch

Policy positions in this race matter more than endorsements. Here are the specific issues worth tracking.

ELOP Funding Stability and Tier Allocation

The current two-tiered funding structure creates real uncertainty for CDE-administered districts near the 55% UPP threshold. Will the next SPI push for structural reforms that reduce that volatility? Will they advocate for per-pupil rate increases? Will they protect Tier 2 LEA allocations if the state faces a budget shortfall?

A formula allocation isn’t the same as political protection. A Superintendent who treats expanded learning as a core accountability program will fight differently in budget negotiations than one who treats it as a line item to trim. CDE leadership sets the tone here.

Chronic Absenteeism and Attendance Data

Chronic absenteeism remains a closely-watched indicator in California, surfaced on the California School Dashboard and referenced in CDE’s public communications. The SPI’s office plays a direct role in whether expanded learning gets recognized as part of the solution.

SB 153 explicitly encouraged LEAs to use expanded learning as an attendance reengagement strategy. Whether chronic absenteeism becomes a stronger accountability metric on the California School Dashboard — and whether expanded learning participation counts as a meaningful data point — depends partly on SPI leadership. Directors who want to demonstrate program impact on attendance need CDE to build the infrastructure that makes that case visible.

CALPADS Reporting and Data Infrastructure

AB 1113 (2024) brought expanded learning data — ELOP, ASES, and 21st CCLC participation — into CALPADS starting with the 2025-26 reporting year. The state’s addition of a new LEAP file to CALPADS workflows is a significant expansion of the annual reporting workload, and it reflects a broader trend toward tighter integration between expanded learning data and California’s longitudinal system.

The next SPI will influence how that integration develops: whether reporting timelines get rationalized, whether CDE invests in tools that reduce burden on district data teams, and whether the state moves toward real-time attendance visibility or stays with the current end-of-year batch model. If you’ve spent late spring debugging CALPADS extract files, you understand what’s at stake.

Community Schools and Expanded Learning Integration

California’s Community Schools Partnership Program, administered by CDE, has distributed substantial funding to build wraparound service models in high-need schools. The question for expanded learning directors is direct: does the next SPI treat ELOP and community schools as complementary systems, or as parallel structures that compete for the same students and staff?

Integration has real benefits: shared staffing, co-located services, coordinated scheduling. Siloing has real costs. The SPI shapes this relationship through CDE guidance, grant conditions, and the priorities it signals at statewide convenings. A Superintendent who understands that ELOP and community schools serve overlapping populations can reduce duplication and strengthen both.

Where the Major Candidates Stand

Ten candidates have filed. Here’s where the serious contenders stand on the issues that matter most to expanded learning — no endorsements, just the record.

Al Muratsuchi (D) — Assemblymember, Chair of Assembly Education Committee

Muratsuchi is the only candidate who has authored legislation directly shaping ELOP. His AB 2112 (2024) stabilized per-pupil funding for Tier 2 LEAs and established a stakeholder working group to develop recommendations on data collection, evaluation, and best practices for expanded learning programs. He also authored AB 1607 and AB 1609, bills addressing how attendance volatility affects LCFF funding for districts. His Assembly record includes leading the fight for universal afterschool programs and authoring the $10B Prop 2 school facilities bond. In 2025, he joined SPI Thurmond in announcing California’s commitment to cut chronic absenteeism 50% in five years through community schools and family supports. Endorsed by the California Federation of Teachers.

Josh Newman (D) — Former State Senator, Chair of Senate Education Committee

Newman has the most detailed platform on attendance data infrastructure. His absenteeism priority page explicitly calls for additional ELOP funding above the current $4 billion allocation, citing expanded learning programs as “proven” tools for improving attendance and school connectedness. In his GrowSF questionnaire, Newman frames CALPADS modernization as his top data-system priority and calls for a modern public performance dashboard, with concrete performance goals for reducing reporting lag, launching a statewide dashboard, and deploying early warning tools to every district during his term. Before politics, Newman founded and sold ed-tech startups providing data, analytics, and SIS tools to schools. He co-authored the $10B Prop 2 school facilities bond and has endorsements from numerous superintendents and school board members across the state.

Richard Barrera (D) — San Diego Unified School Board President

Barrera has led the San Diego Unified School Board since 2008, most recently as Board President. In 2024, SPI Tony Thurmond brought him on as a Senior Policy Advisor at the California Department of Education, a role that gives him direct working knowledge of CDE operations. In his GrowSF questionnaire, Barrera lists fully-funded, equitable public education as his top policy priority, calling for Proposition 98 to be treated as a floor rather than a ceiling and for sustainable, progressive revenue that reaches students with the greatest needs. However, his platform has no specific positions on ELOP, ASES, or afterschool programs, and he has emphasized base LCFF funding over categorical grants in public remarks. He holds the California Teachers Association endorsement — the most powerful union endorsement in this race.

Anthony Rendon (D) — Former Assembly Speaker

Rendon is the most politically powerful candidate in the field, having served as California Assembly Speaker before running for SPI. His campaign issues page names early education as a stated priority, referencing the Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education he convened as Speaker. Rendon has publicly advocated for community schools as a long-term direction for California education. His platform does not include specific positions on ELOP, ASES, afterschool programs, or attendance data systems.

Sonja Shaw (R) — Chino Valley USD Board President

Shaw is the leading Republican candidate. Her platform centers on back-to-basics academics, parental rights, and reducing state mandates. She advocates for local control, less CDE oversight, and what she frames as fiscal accountability in California education spending. Her campaign has no stated positions on ELOP, afterschool programs, attendance data systems, or expanded learning. Her role on the Chino Valley USD school board drew statewide attention during debates over district transgender notification policy. Her campaign has drawn endorsements from Republican legislators and law enforcement organizations.

Quick-Reference Comparison

Questions to Ask When Candidates Show Up

The race will bring candidates to education conferences and forums throughout 2026. Here’s what to ask — not to vet their politics, but to assess their operational understanding.

Have they authored or championed expanded learning legislation? ELOP exists because of sustained legislative effort to build a statewide framework. A candidate who has personally worked on that infrastructure understands it differently than one learning about it on the trail. CDE guidance reflects whatever the legislature actually passes.

Do they have specific plans for attendance data modernization? Vague commitments to “improving data systems” are easy. Ask about real-time reporting, faster CALPADS processing, or SIS-to-state interoperability.

Do they understand how ELOP and ASES programs actually operate? Can they describe CDE compliance requirements accurately? Do they know the difference between Tier 1 and Tier 2 obligations? Operational fluency matters.

Are they talking about ELOP funding specifically — not just overall education funding? Candidates who can speak to CDE UPP thresholds, per-pupil rates, and the ASES-ELOP relationship have done the homework.

The Stakes

Your programs exist because California made a historic investment in expanded learning. The next SPI will determine whether that investment grows, holds steady, or quietly erodes. They will decide how CDE staffs its expanded learning team, how aggressively it monitors programs, and how loudly it advocates during budget season. Those decisions will show up in your work in 2027 and beyond.

Stay informed. Ask candidates these questions when you have the chance. Show up to forums.

At Attendly, we’re tracking this election closely — because the CDE policy environment your programs depend on is the same environment we build for.

Primary: June 2, 2026. General election (if no majority): November 3, 2026.