budget allocation to education in pakistan

Government expenditure on education, total (% of GDP) - Pakistan

Selected Countries and Economies

All countries and economies.

• Privacy Notice
• Access to Information

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here.

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Daily Times

Your right to know Tuesday, May 28, 2024

Budget 2022-23: Rs 44bn allocated for higher education

Muhammad Faisal Kaleem

June 11, 2022

The federal budget worth more than Rs 9,000 billion for the fiscal year 2022-23 unveiled on Friday by Federal Minister for Finance and Revenue Miftah Ismail in the National Assembly (NA) in which more than Rs 44.17 billion has been allocated for the development budget of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) for various projects.

According to the budget documents, the government allocated Rs 5 billion for 13 new projects of different kinds in the budget while over Rs. 38.72 billion has been allocated for the 131 projects already underway. The documents stated that Rs 5 billion 90 crore would be spent on 25 ongoing development projects while Rs 1 billion 249 million to be allocated for 9 new development projects in the federal education sector.

As per documents, there are 134 other projects including Rs 10 billion for campuses, Rs 12 billion for sub-campuses of public school universities and Rs 10 billion for 3,000 Allama Muhammad Iqbal Scholarships for the Afghan Taliban. “During the same period, 13 new development projects of HEC have included Rs. 15 billion for provision of lab facilities in five leading engineering universities of the country, Rs. 15 billion for Youth Laptop Scheme and 11 other small projects”, it added.

Moreover, a total of Rs 7.23 billion has been allocated in the federal education and technical training development budget. On the other hand, as per documents, the Ministry of Education released a total of 25 development projects in the financial year 23-2022 including Rs 150 million for 1600 children of Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, 200 for the construction of new graduate block of National College of Arts, Lahore and Rs 50 million, 200 million for construction of Directorate General of Religions Affair, Rs 100 million for construction of Federal College of Home Economics in F-11 and Rs 47 million for College Boys in G-13 to Islamabad as well as Rs 68 million for establishment of Model College for Boys in G-15, Rs 30 million for establishment of Boys College in Margalla Town, Rs 106 million for establishment of National Curriculum Council, Rs 500 million for PREP project on infectious diseases. Rs 3000 million for the Prime Minister’s Skill for All Catalyst for Tuition Sector project, Rs 382 million for the provision of basic facilities in federal educational institutions, Rs 500 million for code restoration project and other projects. Rs 144 million for the recruitment of 200 computer teachers in women’s educational institutions in the financial year 2022-23, Rs 1000 million for the establishment of 250 vocational training institutes and Rs 102 million allocated for two other projects.

Submit a Comment

Home Lead Stories Latest News Editor’s Picks

Culture Life & Style Featured Videos

Editorials OP-EDS Commentary Advertise

Cartoons Letters Blogs Privacy Policy

Contact Company’s Financials Investor Information Terms & Conditions

• Profit Magazine
• Pakistan Today

Bearish sentiment grips PSX as KSE-100 falls below 75,000

Dewan farooque motors to launch kia ‘shehzore’ in june 2024, nishat chunian demands rs 8.35bn payment from power division after nab…, british american tobacco warns of potential exit from pakistan over increasing…, petroleum prices set to drop by up to rs7.50/litre, another day, another bright idea from our taxmen, can treet corporation overcome its beard problem, the rise of gt road megalopolis: unchecked urban development in punjab, already discounted, the kia sportage is selling for another lakh less, in conversation with indrive’s daniil petin, let’s take a hard look at net metering, why have mncs left pakistan and what will it take for…, managing exits; how to fire an employee, value trapped, govt plans to establish 10 it parks by next year, pakistan records highest-ever monthly it exports of $310mn in april , the problem is access to credit, not payments claims abhi ceo…, tech funding might be recovering in the us, but the trickle…, instagram surpasses youtube in ad revenue, education sector receives marginal budget boost for 2023-24.

The government’s allocation of Rs. 97.098 billion for Education Affairs and Services in the federal budget for the fiscal year 2023-24 has drawn attention and criticism for its modest increase of around 5.5 percent compared to the revised allocation of the current fiscal year.

With Pakistan’s public expenditure on education as a percentage of GDP estimated at 1.7 percent for the fiscal year 2022-23, the country holds the lowest regional ranking in terms of education funding. The need for greater investment in the education sector to address the challenges and gaps in quality education has been emphasized by experts and education advocates.

The bulk of the allocated funds, amounting to Rs. 76.589 billion, has been designated for Tertiary Education Affairs and Services, accounting for approximately 79 percent of the total allocation under this category. Meanwhile, Rs. 4.468 billion has been earmarked for pre-primary and primary education affairs, representing an increase from the previous year’s allocation. Similarly, Rs. 10.778 billion has been set aside for Secondary Education Affairs and Services.

The budget also includes a provision of Rs. 3.698 billion for administration, aimed at supporting the management and coordination of educational institutions. However, concerns have been raised regarding the adequacy of these funds to address the administrative needs and enhance the overall education system.

Since the 18th Constitutional amendment, education has been devolved to the provinces, and the federal government primarily focuses on financing higher education. In line with this, the Higher Education Commission (HEC) has been allocated Rs. 59.71 billion under the Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) for the fiscal year 2023-24, reflecting an increase from the previous year’s allocation. This allocation aims to support the development and improvement of higher education institutions across the country.

While the increase in the education budget allocation demonstrates a degree of attention to the sector, the modest growth has raised concerns about the government’s commitment to addressing the pressing challenges in education. Education advocates stress the need for substantial investments to enhance access, quality, and inclusivity in education, ensuring a brighter future for the country’s youth and sustainable development overall.

Education section in Pakistan always ignored. Budgetary allocation may be in order to improve the basic which is required for everyone

Thank you for highlighting the concern. It’s crucial that we continue advocating for greater investment in education to ensure a brighter future for our nation.

Nice information

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

RELATED ARTICLES

Nishat chunian demands rs 8.35bn payment from power division after nab ends probe, british american tobacco warns of potential exit from pakistan over increasing taxes, british american tobacco warns of potential exit from pakistan over increasing..., pm orders immediate end to unannounced load shedding, 9th national ecommerce council meeting held to formulate revised policy.

• Privacy policy

1.5pc dip: Education gets Rs90.556bn

ISLAMABAD: The government has earmarked Rs 90.556 billion for Education Affairs and Services in the federal budget for 2022-23 against the revised allocation of Rs 91.970 billion for the current fiscal year, showing a decrease of around 1.5 percent.

Pakistan’s public expenditure on education as percentage to GDP is estimated at 1.7 percent in fiscal year 2021-22 against 1.9 percent for last fiscal year, which is the lowest in the region.

The bulk of expenditure of Rs 74.609 billion has been allocated for Tertiary Education Affairs and Services in budget 2022-23, 83 percent of the total allocation under this head.

The government has earmarked Rs 3.786 billion for pre-primary and primary education affairs for 2022-23 against Rs 3.021 billion for 2021-22. Rs 8.863 billion have been earmarked for Secondary Education Affairs & Services for 2022-23 against Rs 7.632 billion for 2021-22, and Rs 2 billion for administration against Rs 1.915 billion for 2021-22 which was later revised to Rs 2.028 billion.

Public sector universities: VCs concerned over drastic cut in higher education budget

After the 18th Constitutional amendment, education as a subject was devolved to provinces, and federal government mainly finances the higher education.

According to the budget documents Rs 44.174 billion has been earmarked for Higher Education Commission (HEC) under the Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) for 2022-23 against Rs 42.450 billion for 2021-22 which was later revised downward to Rs 26.338 billion. Further Rs 65 billion has been earmarked for HEC under the head of expenditure.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

Comments are closed.

Ministry of Finance expects inflation to fall further to 13.5-14.5% in May

Rupee registers marginal decline against us dollar, negativity at psx, kse-100 falls below 75,000, at least 28 dead as quetta-bound bus falls into ditch, dfml says it has commenced production of kia shehzore, rollout on june 4, gold price per tola increases rs2,400 in pakistan, yemen’s houthis target six ships in three seas, israel says gaza war likely to last another seven months as tanks probe rafah, oil prices gain on expectations of opec+ extension to output cuts, pakistan, saint lucia formalise diplomatic relations, world’s largest humanitarian network calls for gaza ceasefire, read more stories.

Most Popular

• Past 3 Days

Budget 2024-25: expectations

Discos’ privatisation: Shehbaz for speeding up process

Njli sarmaya growth fund rates.

FBR to replace WeBOC with new digital system

FBR plans to collect Rs1.296trn thru duties

Auto industry, why discos’ privatisation can never happen.

Major changes in tax laws expected through Finance Bill 2024

Youm-e-Takbeer: PM Shehbaz announces public holiday on May 28

Farmers propose ‘fixed tax regime’ for agri sector

‘NAB ends probes’: NCPL demands PD pay Rs8.35bn withheld amount

Tackling the solar storm

Phenomenal rise in domestic borrowing.

Public assets: Ministry seeks data to share it with IMF

Previous flawed decisions hampering improvement in power sector?

Malik Riaz says has refused to become ‘pawn’

Education Budget of Pakistan

Budget provide an apprehension into the Government’s policy priorities. Education receives a remarkable fragment of Federal and Provincial budgets every year. The government has allocated Rs. 83.3 billion for Education Affairs and Services in the federal budget for 2020–21 against the revised allocation of Rs. 81.2 billion for the ongoing fiscal year, showing an imperceptible rise of around 2.5%. Pakistan’s public expenditure on education as a percentage to GDP is estimated at 2.3% in the fiscal year 2019-20, which is the lowest in the region. Compared to international benchmarks, the allocated budget for education is lowest as of the agreed targets of 15-20% of the total budget and 4% of the GDP. With the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030 insight, it is important to note the challenges of limited public financing for education and its efficacy.

Composition of Education Budget:

The government has reserved Rs. 2.931 billion for pre-Primary & Primary Education Affairs for 2020-2 against Rs. 2.83 billion for 2019-20, Rs. 7.344 billion reserved for Secondary Education Affairs & Services for 2020-21 against Rs. 6.718 billion for 2019-20, Rs. 1.237 billion for administration against Rs. 1.407 billion for 2019-20 which was later emended to Rs. 727 million.

According to the Human Development Report, 2019 Pakistan is ranked 152 out of 189 countries in the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Human Development Index (HDI) ranking. Pakistan has not demonstrated any progress in key educational indicators, such as literacy rate, gross enrolment ratio, and expenditure on education, as compared to the adjoining regional territories.

Pakistan’s literacy rate, at 57%, straggle well behind its bordering countries. The primary school dropout rate is 22.7% which is alarming given it as at the stage of developmental learning. Pakistan has not made a sufficient progress in enhancing the education outcomes. A literacy rate of only 60% (40% of its population remains unable to read or write) significantly restricts the opportunities towards obtaining additional skills and technical knowledge for higher efficiency and finer-earning levels. Gross Enrolment Rates (GER) at the primary level excluding kindergarten for the age group 6-10 years at the national level during 2018-19 persisted at 87% as compared to 2015-16.

Province wise data propose that Punjab manifested an improvement from 93% in 2015-16 to 95% in 2018-19, Sindh remained stable with primary level GER at 78%, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa improved to 89% in 2018-19 against 88% in 2015-16, while Balochistan evidenced a reduction from 59% in 2015-16 to 57% in 2018-19.

Net Enrolment Rates (NER) at the national level during 2018-19 moderately enhanced from 65% in 2015-16 to 66% in 2018-19. Punjab speculated a development of 73% in 2018-19 as compared to 71% in 2015-16. Sindh witnessed an improvement of 58% in 2018-19 in contrast to 56%  in 2015-16. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa witnessed a slack from 67% in 2015-16 to 66% in 2018-19, while Balochistan remained steady with primary level NER at 40%.

The allocation of Rs. 150 million for various other initiatives has been earmarked for introducing latest Matric-Tech Pathways for Integrating Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) and Formal Education. Rs 100 million for provision of Leftover Infrastructure in Islamabad Model College for Girls, Bhara Kahu Islamabad, and Rs 60 million for Pilot Project on Improving Recruitment and On-Boarding of Teachers in FDE (Federal Directorate of Education) Schools is allocated in the budget.

  Budget and Pakistan Alliance for Girls’ Education:

Girls are predominant to Pakistan’s long-term goals to become a successful country and to achieve the SDGs. Pakistan Alliance for Girls Education is committed to support all stakeholders to expand their agendas for girl’s education and to bring them back to schools. The COVID-19 crisis has already affected the status of girls’ education in Pakistan and will have its consequences in the longer run. With education and its quality becoming an increasingly difficult challenge, it is hapless that funds are not being well allocated for underprivileged community, more alarmingly, not being spent to the fullest to get the maximum results.

The government must capitalize approximately Rs6.5 trillion to guarantee that every out-of-school girl in Pakistan has access to formal education by 2030. Currently 22.8 million or 44% children in Pakistan are not enrolled in school, with the dominance of it being girls. Despite the demand and operational supply concerns, the core issue of the execrable state of education in the country has been the appalling investment in the sector. As a signatory of the ‘Education 2030 Incheon Declaration and Framework for Action, 2015,’ Pakistan should disburse at least 4% of its GDP on education, as well as grant at least 15% of its public spending towards education.

Therefore, although education being prdominantly a provincial subject, the burden of the responsibility to rectify the state of education lies mainly on the federal government.  The country cannot overcome its education crisis without securing at least 12 years of education for every Pakistani girl. By allocating at least 6% of the GDP to education Pakistan can then guarantee the development of a structured and improved infrastructure of educational strategies. Financing the human capital, such as education, health and nutrition, are foundation for building a progressive foundation for Human Security.

Share This Post, Choose Your Platform!

Related posts.

Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) and Pakistan Alliance for Girls Education (PAGE) Join Forces to Bridge the Digital Gender Gap

Pakistan Alliance for Girls’ Education (PAGE) Announces Shariah-Compliant Zakat Collection

Meeting on Pre-National Interfaith Dialogue on Girls Education

Signing of LoU with the Pakistan Foundational Learning Hub-Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training (MoFEPT).

Pakistan Alliance for Girls Education (PAGE) Celebrates Winning the Prestigious UNESCO Prize for Girls’ and Women’s Education 2023

Page bank & registration details, us bank details.

Fifth Third Bank 640 Pasquinelli Drive, Westmont, IL 60559

Donation checks by mail/courier: 

WCMP 101 W 22nd St. #108 Lombard, IL 60148

Write “ PAGE” in Memo

PAK Bank Details

——————————————————————————————-

UK Bank Details

Uk charity registration number: 1185727.

Education Sector: Marginal Budget Boost for 2023-24

Pakistan’s education sector has received a marginal increase in the budget for the fiscal year 2023-24, raising concerns about the government’s commitment to addressing the pressing challenges in education. With a modest growth of approximately 5.5 percent compared to the revised allocation of the current fiscal year, experts and education advocates emphasize the need for greater investment to bridge the gaps in quality education and ensure a brighter future for the country’s youth.

Tertiary Education Takes Center Stage

The bulk of the budget, around 79 percent of the total allocation, has been designated for Tertiary Education Affairs and Services. While prioritizing higher education is important, a more balanced approach with comprehensive funding across all education levels is necessary.

Pre-Primary and Primary Education: A Slight Increase

Rs. 4.468 billion has been earmarked for pre-primary and primary education affairs, reflecting a slight increase from the previous year’s allocation, according to finance.gov.pk. However, it is crucial to recognize the importance of early education as the foundation of a strong education system. A significant allocation is needed to improve early education and ensure adequate infrastructure for young learners.

Addressing Secondary Education Needs

Rs. 10.778 billion has been set aside for Secondary Education Affairs and Services, demonstrating a commitment to addressing the needs of the secondary education sector. Additional support may be required to enhance access and ensure quality education at this level.

Concerns over Administrative Support

Rs. 3.698 billion has been allocated for administration to support educational institutions’ management and coordination. However, concerns have been raised regarding the adequacy of these funds to address administrative needs and enhance the overall education system. A more substantial allocation is necessary to strengthen administrative support.

Higher Education Commission (HEC) Funding

In line with the devolution of education to the provinces, the federal government primarily focuses on financing higher education. The HEC has been allocated Rs. 59.71 billion under the Public Sector Development Programme (PSDP) for 2023-24. This allocation aims to support the development and improvement of higher education institutions nationwide.

Conclusion:

While the marginal increase in the education budget allocation for the fiscal year 2023-24 demonstrates some attention to the sector, concerns persist regarding the government’s commitment to comprehensively addressing education challenges. Adequate funding for all education levels, especially pre-primary and primary education, is crucial to building a strong foundation. Moreover, ensuring efficient administrative support and making substantial investments are necessary to bridge the gaps in education access, quality, and inclusivity. By prioritizing education and allocating appropriate resources, the government can pave the way for a brighter future for Pakistan’s youth and contribute to sustainable development.

Source: www.finance.gov.pk/budget/Budget_2023_24/Speech_english_2023_24.pdf

Related Articles

PMDC Introduces NOC Requirement for Pakistani Medical Students Studying Abroad

Pakistan to Launch New Satellite PAKSAT MM-1 on May 30

Jaranwala Part Two: Sargodha’s Christians Bear the Brunt of Blasphemy Accusations

Heatwave Alert: Karachi Set to Experience Hottest Week of 2024

• Cover Stories
• Stocks Analysis
• PAGE Reports

Previous Editions

• Archive Articles 2023
• Archive Articles 2022
• Archive Articles 2021
• Archive Articles 2020
• Archive Articles 2019
• Archive Articles 2018

Education in Pakistan: problems, challenges and perspectives

Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah said and I quote:

“Education is a matter of life and death for Pakistan. The world is progressing so rapidly that without requisite advance in education, not only shall we lag behind others but maybe wiped out altogether.”

The education section of the executive summary of the Economic Survey of Pakistan 2021-22 notes: “Pakistan is committed to transform its education system into a high-quality global-market demand-driven system in accordance with Goal 4 of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) .” However, the reality is vastly different.

The literacy rate in Pakistan in 2021 was only 62.8%. Any gains in literacy rates over the last many years have been small, slow and marginal.

In 2021-22, we spent only 1.77% of GDP on education-related expenditure at both the federal and provincial levels. Most UN agencies recommend that the minimum expenditure on education should be 4% of GDP. In recent years, the highest percentage of GDP we have spent on education was in 2017-18, when education expenditures were raised to 2.12%. The usual argument given for lack of spending on education has always been and still is that we do not have the resources.

In Pakistan, the current literacy rate is 62.3%. In Budget 1.7% of GDP has been allocated as Education Budget which is lowest in the region. The expenditure of Rs 74,609 billion has been allocated for Tertiary Education Affairs & Services in budget 2022-23; Rs 3,786 billion for pre-primary & primary education; Rs 8,863 billion for Secondary Education Affairs and Rs 2 billion for administration. Rs 44,174 billion has been earmarked for Higher Education Commission ( HEC ) under the Public Sector Development Program (PSDP) for the year 2022-23. (Business Recorder June 11, 2022).

According to data from the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report 2017-18, the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) shows Pakistan’s slow performance being ranked 129th of the 137 countries, on the Health and Primary Education related elements of competitiveness, when compared with other countries in the region like India, China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Malaysia. The structure of school education system in the public sector is depicted in Fig. below.

Figure Above: The structure of school education system in Pakistan (Pre-Primary to Higher Secondary)

Education system creates sense of responsibility among people and they come to know the methods to achieve their national, societal and personal rights and it also enhances their general consciousness needed to deliver their duties as citizens towards their Nation. Once the realization originates, people start working for the development and prosperity of their motherland in the atmosphere of trust and co-operation.

The polarization and non – unified education system has resulted into outraged political turmoil, deadly terrorism, incessant sectorial violence, social disruption, economic instability and degeneration of government system. Whether it is poverty, non-availability of jobs, security uncertainty, sectarianism or terrorism, lack of tolerance, lack of general awareness, illiteracy, all are off shoots of the poor, inefficient and ineffective education system. The lowest budget allocation, a realm of large number of ineffective education policies has badly failed to take country out of economic, social, political and development quagmire.

Education has fundamental role in the economic, social, political and structural development of any nation. Many of the economic issues like poverty , overpopulation, unemployment , resource mobilization, inflation, exchange rate drastic fluctuation, housing, infrastructure, and health can be reduced and handled by improving education system in Pakistan. Education can also solve social issues like Baradari system, Wadera Culture, Chaudary regime and slave mentality. The political issues like battle for power by different politicians, lawlessness, fraud, corruption, religious riots, extremism, processions to gain popularity, use of indecent remarks, no public service, no human investment to save the lives of ignorant and deprived humans. Structural Development like transition from primitive methodologies to modern strategies; Shifts from Agriculture to Industry, hand made tools to mechanization, from physical conventional education system to Online Education and adoption of highly sophisticated and up to the mark technology can only happen with the strong Education Policy and implementation of country’s education system.

Pakistan, since its inception has failed to establish an education system which can fulfill the aspirations of the general public. Being a developing country, Pakistan is facing multifaceted problems and issues in the education sector. There are many issues prevalent and practiced in Pakistan’s Education System at all levels of Education – primary, secondary – colleges or universities.

The educational institutions within the country are divided into following categories: (1) Pre-primary School (2) Primary School (3) Middle School (4) High School (5) Higher Secondary (6) Inter-colleges (7) Degree Colleges (8) Universities (9) Non-formal Basic Education (10) Education foundations (11) Technical & Vocational Institutions (12) Teacher Training Institutions (13) Deeni Madaris

Pakistan’s schooling system consists of three main school types namely public sector schools, private sector schools and Deeni Madaris. These are further divided as public and private mainly due to curriculum and examination systems used in the schools and the language of instructions used by teachers.

The Broad Categories on education level are:

School Education (Pre-primary – Class 12) College Education (Degree Colleges Class 13-14) University Education

The education system of Pakistan is comprised of 305,763 institutions accommodating 51,186,560 9 students and 2,073,433 teachers. The system is composed of 189,748 (62%) public institutions and 116,015 (38%) private institutions, which also include 31,115 Deeni Madaris. The public sector is serving 28.49 million (56%) students to complete their education while the remaining 22.70 million (44%) are enrolled in the private sector of education. About 38 percent private educational institutions are facilitating 44 percent of students showing a slightly higher per-institution enrolment ratio in the private sector compared to the public sector.

There are a total of 186 universities & degree awarding institutions catering to the needs of higher degree students in both public and private sectors of education. Out of these universities, 111 (60%) are working under umbrella of public sector, whereas 75 (40%) are working in the private sector.

The total enrolment in the universities and degree awarding institutions is 1.576 million. Out of these 1.266 million (80%) students are enrolled in public sector whereas, 0.309 million (20%) students are studying in private universities and degree awarding institutions. In the overall national scenario only four percent students have access to university education. The total male enrolment in the universities is 0.881 million (56%), whereas, the female enrolment is 0.695 million (44%) . There are 56,885 teachers imparting higher education to the students in these universities. Universities in the public sector employ 38,011 (67%) teachers while those in the private sector have 18,874 (33%) teachers.

The significant issues of Education system are lack of Budget Allocation, lack of Policy Implementation, Faulty examination System, Poor Infra Structure of Educational Institutions, Lack of Teacher’s quality, low enrolment, Wayward and Directionless Education system, High scale drop outs, Increasing Political Interference, Out dated curriculum, corruption, Poor Management and Supervision, lack of Uniformity, lack of research, lack of faculty training and Development, Cost of Education, Terrorist Attacks, Cultural Constraints, lack of Parent input, Widening gap between Educational Institutions and Community, lack of Academia Industry Linkage program and Learning Crisis etc.

Education is the nurturing and nourishing force for the construction of strong and impressive societal set up, prominent development and significant growth of the country. Education explores new dimensions and polishes the hidden talent, potential, capabilities and strengths of individuals and redirect these forces towards the rise of Pakistan as a powerful nation on the global horizon.

Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisioned Education System of Pakistan as the driving force behind all the national goals. In the first National Education Conference held at Karachi. It was decided that Education System will work according to the National aspirations of Pakistan and it will be truly related to the needs of the people of Pakistan. The father of Nation said, “The magnificent goal of Education sector will be to develop character of Pakistan, high sense of responsibility, social integrity, selfless service to the Nation and morality on the part of the people of Pakistan.

Critical analysis of the problems and issues of education system in Pakistan.

These are the most dominant issues and problems of our Education System which needs to be addressed and to find remedial solutions for these issues and put forward recommendations for the positive change in our prevalent Education System.

1- Lack of uniformity

The Education System is not Uniform and is based on differentiated Education System like Public Institutions, Private Institutions and Deeni Madaris. There has been accelerated polarization in the Education System due to divisive Pakistani Education System. This has penetrated into cultural veins of the Nation. The recent waves of Sectarianism and Terrorism are the consequences of this divisible system. Polarized Education System has further divided society on political, economic and social grounds instead of uniting people. This division is leading towards further segregation on linguistic and religious levels and cutting knee deep the ideological foundation of the Nation.

2- Education without direction

A sound Education System is essential for every nation of the world. All nations develop their people or human resources on the basis of rigorous focus on Education and Training . We have poor and direction less education system with lack of cohesion and more prone towards general education without creation of Skillful man power resulting into massive unemployment. It also results into massive political, social, economic and cultural distress among people. There is no use of science and technology in the education system. Students are unable to develop critical thinking, creativity, imagination, reasoning, experimentation, innovation and invention

3- Outdated curriculum

We are still following the old fashioned and outdated Education System of rote memorization, cramming the facts and figures without realizing the holistic development of individuals. The objective of Education should be development of psychological, philosophical and sociological foundations of Education. The present curriculum is not motivating learners for practical research and development, scientific knowledge and reflective observation.

4- Lack of professional development of teachers

There are few training institutes but have lack of funds, lack of resourceful and trained trainers and administers. There are no defined standards of training and development. The courses and trainings are outdated, traditional without exposure to modern technology, motivation, quality of teachers and enhancement of skills .

5- Lack of quality teacher

According to UNESCO report, the quality of educational institutions and teacher is low. The situation is grimmer in remote parts of Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan where there is non availability of teachers. Teachers are not using new methods of teaching and learning, no lesson planning, old method of cramming, no research, no use of libraries or internet, no book reading. Students are promoted to next class on the basis of cramming and memorization of facts and figures without knowledge in depth, no conceptualization, no understanding of topics in the books without relevance in schools.

6- Alarming dropouts

Lack of management and discipline in schools leads many students to drop out from school. This trend is due to punishment in schools, poor parenting, lack of motivation, unattractive school environment, child labor & poverty are also very significant reasons of huge drop out from schools, colleges and universities. It shows that almost 30% of children enrolled in primary education. This trend has added to low literacy rate in Pakistan.

7- Examination system

Students are evaluated on the basis of annual exams, semester wise assessments. Both quantitative and qualitative exams should be introduced to judge the performance of students on comprehensive level and exams should evaluate the student’s ability through various types of reliable assessments like case studies, research papers, MCQs, Comprehensive subjective questions, Analytical questions to check the conceptual understanding of students especially in higher classes (Rehman, 2011).

In Pakistan examination system is faulty and it tests only the memory of students, there is use of unfair means, bribery, cheating, issuance of duplicate marks sheets, changes of marks, change of answer sheets, impersonation. This present examination system has promoted rote memorization and cramming. It has badly failed in producing critical thinking, analytical skills, learning, intellectual power and visionary reflection in the students at all levels of education. It does not measure the strength, achievements and performance of students (Quereshi, 1975).

Modular system of examination in Medical Universities is producing incompetent students with insufficient knowledge of Anatomy which is the backbone of medicine studies. In modular system a single paper for three subjects is given to students. Students prepare easy subjects to pass the exam and leave the difficult and important subject of Anatomy for choice. Therefore, this method has tarnished the strong foundations of learning and performing badly. Doctors produced with such type of examination with lack of proper understanding of subject will not be able to serve the humanity honestly and do the justice with their profession.

In our education system educational institutions are used as breeding grounds for political parties and in colleges and universities these groups nurture. Students get benefits by being part of any political party during exams. A list of students is provided to the teacher by the student leader to pass them in the exam, admissions are given on the party basis, exams are marked and checked on party basis because mostly teachers are also working for parties while sitting in educational institutions. During Board or University exam by giving money to the invigilator, students are allowed to cheat in the exam, Students throw question paper outside the window and one of the party rep climbs up the tree near the window with Megaphone and starts dictating answers by calling up question numbers. Honest Teachers are threatened and sometimes gunned and killed in case they are not willing to listen to the unfair demands of the students of different parties.

Some of the teachers are also involved in malpractices. They leak the paper by charging handsome amounts or solve the papers for students or allow students to solve the papers by cheating from books, material or from some good student. In board exams, before submission of sheets to the board office representative student is asked to write down correct answers. Teachers are themselves involved in such political activities and award “F” grade to students who are not in their party.

In Russia there is no exam system like ours. Students study through out the year and at the end of year teacher can ask any question from the book to pass the candidate and check his understanding & knowledge of the subject.

8- Poor supervision standards

To monitor teaching and learning, poor and harsh standards of evaluation and punishment are used which in some case leads to termination of jobs . At primary school level teacher’s evaluation is not possible. Secondary Schools/Cambridge Schools are evaluated through Board exam results/CAIE results. In college, again Board or University exam results are the criteria to judge the academic performance of Student and Teacher’s teaching. Whereas, actually there is an increase in tuitions instead of relying on School or College teaching. Students and their parents are compelled to go for tuitions due pressure of good grades and admissions in good educational institutions. There are many tuition centres, coaching centres, academies where the same teachers who were unable to impart quality education give quality tuitions by charging heavy amounts and prepare students well to score good grades. The low salaries demotivate them in their institutions to impart good education. In Universities students are given power to evaluate teaching and their grading becomes part of an Annual Evaluation Report which is essential for promotion or benefit of the faculty. This system is again polluted by involvement of computer department staff, Student coordinators and by bribing students to give bad remarks about any teacher. Some insincere and corrupt teachers mark students’ attendance and give them good marks, tell them questions of exams and do immoral activities to get good evaluation from students. Teachers who are honest and hard working are ranked low by students. Even at higher education institutions there is lobbying and politics through which false evaluation against any faculty can be prepared to get rid of the unwanted faculty by the management. So, in short, supervision system is more prone to harassment and control over the teaching staff rather than providing proper guideline and training for the improvement of teaching methodologies & strategies. (Rehman, 2011).

9- Internal and external influence

In Education sector external factors are coming outside the system through politicians and they bring changes in the system to give favor to their families, relatives, friends etc. Internal factors are bureaucratic manipulations (Mazhar, 2011).

There is great favoritism and Nepotism in cases of transfers, Appointments, Promotions, Salaries, Grades & Work Stations. Due to this the basic Infrastructure of the Education System in Pakistan has been badly affected (LOUIS, 1987).

10- Lack of resources

There are not proper Libraries with physical space for Students to Study. Books are not available, No digital libraries, no computer Facility in the library especially in public sector colleges & universities. No proper lighting, no AC, no Generators in case of power break down are available to make studies more comfortable for the desirous and ambitious students. Class rooms are over-crowded, corridors are flooded with students, Inadequate and Inefficient teachers, Laboratories without required apparatus & equipment of practical learning have resulted into a situation of despair and low standard of Education (Louis, 1987).

11- Lack of policy implementation

Frequent political turmoil and change of governments have made policy implementation in its true letter and spirit impossible. Corruption, Lack of Resources, Lack of teacher’s involvement in policies and inconsistency in successive planning on the part of various political regimes in Pakistan. Teachers are ignored while designing Education policies which has led to alienation between teachers and the system of Education (Zaki, 1989).

12- Low budgetary allocation for education

Education system in Pakistan has been crippled mainly due allocation of scarce financial resources in budget. The Education Budget which is definitely not sufficient to fulfill the growing needs of population and involvement of modern technology in the education system, low salaries, high taxation are also hindering the growth of this sector. Taxes are even imposed on the hourly payment of visiting faculty at the rate of ten percent from filers and twenty percent from non-filers which is really unjustified and reduces the meagre earning.

In many countries like Bangladesh & Sri Lanka the Education share in total budget of the country is increasing but in Pakistan it is continuously declining (Sayan, 2012).

13- Corruption

Corruption is another factor responsible for deterioration of the Education System, use of unfair means, nepotism, favors in transfer, promotion and appointments and decision making, misuse of funds, use of illegal authority by the school management, Gender based exploitation and harassment are the subsidiaries of corruption .

14- Lack of faculty training and development

Educational institutions do not spend available funds on the training and development of teachers. They are neither sent to attend the workshops, courses, seminars or conferences to groom themselves and learn the modern techniques and methodologies of teaching. Here again only few favorite teachers are selected for these trainings and most of the teachers remain deprived of any opportunity to groom their teaching skills.

15- Non- availability of public transport/ parking/traffic congestion

Most of the private schools are located in residential areas usually in bungalows to avoid taxes. Here the big issue is non-availability of public transport, parking and traffic congestion on daily basis. This makes both students and teachers tired and stressed because of wastage of lots of time of travelling to and from school to home. This unnecessary delay in timings also affects the quality of education. Mostly schools do not provide their conveyance to students, teachers and staff but ask them to avail transport of the companies with which the senior management set commission.

16- Opening up of large nuber of private schools

There is opening up of various private schools with a shift from Matric system to O & A level with Up-to-date modern technologies. They have comparatively better infrastructure, spacious class rooms, low strengths of class, more trained teachers, with proper sanitary conditions, counselors, doctors, psychologist, its teachers, sports teacher, swimming pools, etc. Creativity of students is enhanced through various activities. These facilities are missing in public schools so parents prefer to send their children to nearby private schools.

17- Politics in education

Different political parties prepare their representatives amongst students. Different teachers also involve them in this exercise as party members. These teacher in exchange of this get favors and benefits from parties by helping their students in getting admissions, provision of question papers, awarding of good grades as per list provided by the party.

18- Compulsion to purchase stationery, syllabus, uniforms and other items from school shop

School management compels parents to purchase the required stationery, syllabus, uniforms and all other required study material from their own school’s shop where the rates are too high as compared to the open market. This puts burden on the finances of the family and parents have to change the school or leave the school. The school charge fess for 3 moths and invest this amount in different profit schemes to earn interest on it.

During COVID-19 pandemic when due lock down schools were closed and even online classes were not in practice, school charged full fee from the students and parents had no option except listening to the management and doing as they demand to keep admission of their child locked and secured.

19- Entry tests, coaching and paper out

All the admissions have been linked with admission test in more or less all institutions making the credibility of different schools, boards, colleges and universities doubtful just to give benefits to the students who are non-deserving and not coming on merit with their results. Every year we hear about MCAT test, usually tests are postponed or test paper is out and re-exam is arranged and many of the students with good grades are pushed out of the admission list. The private colleges have their own test criteria and select students as per their own policies and even charge fees as per their own policies. Most of the deserving, hard working students due to the demand of heavy fees are forced to move towards some other institution. Every year PMDC is dissolved. For these entry tests students join academies, tuition centres and coaching centre and pay high charges to prepare for admission in all these high ranked Engineering and Medical institutes.

These admission tests are introduced to favor their own families, relatives, friends or workers of the political parties to strengthen their vote bank in their constituency.

These tests are fake, their results are fake, the merit lists displayed are fake. In this way many deserving students do not get chance to pursue education of their own choice.

20- Theoretical knowledge inplace of practical learning

Students are given only bookish theoretical knowledge instead of practical knowledge. Most of the students even after getting degrees do not meet the requirement of jobs and are unable to be absorbed in the working population. Students should be sent at least for one semester in organizations before their graduation so that they may become acquainted with the office environment and familiar with the working of different reputable organizations. Activities, Role plays, Case Studies, Worksheets, Research Projects, Seminars, Symposiums, Lecture Series, Events should be organized for the students with their hundred percent involvement so the students not only own the activity but get an opportunity to meet influential people from big companies of reputable brands.

21- Lack of liaison between industry and educational institutions

Mostly universities have no liaison with industries and therefore their students face problems at the time of induction. Universities should invite industrialists to teach courses especially in the last two semester of their studies so that students can learn about the ins and outs of the industrial workings and may get a chance of absorption in the industry as employees.

22- Non-participatory in nation building

Education Sector is not playing any role in Nation Building. Our Education System is producing students with mindset that only foreign countries are providing good education and to get good job it is necessary to become foreign graduates. Mostly Students lack patriotism, civic sense, loyalty and love for their homeland and people living here and treat them as inferior to the foreign world. So being Status conscious and due ostentatious effect our crème has moved abroad for higher education. On the other hand, students who get them enrolled here in Pakistan after getting degrees and job search find it best to move abroad for higher studies, job and career growth. Once they get job, they prefer to stay there on permanent basis and become citizens of that country with dual nationality status. Our best youth has settled in European Countries, USA, UK, Canada, Germany, Spain, Italy, Australia, Malaysia, South Africa and Gulf Region and rendering their best services and earning handsome salaries and maintaining luxury life styles in those countries without any fear of security, terrorist attacks, bomb blasts, sectarian riots, traffic congestions, pollution, Smog, energy Shortage etc. By being there they feel satisfied and happy. They do not send any remittances here instead they are calling up their families, relatives and friends to come and transfer their assets to those countries making Pakistan’s economy weaker with this outflow of resources. Our Doctors, Engineers, Architects, Retired Army Officers, Bankers, health workers paramedical staff, skilled labor, business graduates, pilots, Air men, Air Technicians, Aircraft Engineers, Educationists, Insurance Agents, Scientists and Researcher have moved to Western countries and are not willing to come back or serve the Nation.

23- Pupil teacher, pupil school and teacher school ratio

These ratios are very important. If there are more peoples in one class then teacher cannot give individual attention to students. Weak students are neglected and gap between strong and weak students widens. If pupil school ratio increases then infrastructure does not accommodate the increased number of students and in place of two students, three or four students are asked to sit. Other facilities like availability of labs, computers, access to canteens, sports items, playgrounds, washrooms etc. become less for the large number of people. If schools have low number of teachers hirings then work load for one teacher is overburdened and individual attention, mood, behavior, marking of copies/assignments or imparting of quality education is disturbed. The ideal class size is 30 students at most for one teacher but in our universities sometimes more than 100 students are accommodated in one class.

24- Non-availability of electricity

Load shedding and energy crisis in the country has devastatingly ruined the quality of education. In summer when the weather is hot and humid, then in the class of 68-70 students when teacher has very limited space to move, then there is suffocation, lack of oxygen, smell of sweat and loss of student’s attention in studies. This is a source of big demotivation for students and teachers and they want to leave.

25- Non-availability of drinking and washing water in toilets

In most of the schools clean drinking water is not available. Mostly the washrooms are not cleaned on regular basis so health hazards are faced by the students and teachers especially female students suffer a lot because of this. Mostly, schools’ students suffer from cholera, diarrhea, typhoid etc.

26- Non-availability of boundary wall

There are many schools in villages, towns and even cities where schools are working without boundary walls, which has become a security hazard.

27- Terrorist attacks and child killing

Terrorist attacks in schools like APS, Peshawar where a large number of students were killed. Schools are force to provide security to students. Attacks on students, teachers, on school buses, entrance of school buildings have decreased enrollment in schools.

28- Female students and female teachers’ harassment

Female students and female teachers are sexually harassed by male teachers. Many students are threatened not to speak against the culprit. In universities many male teachers award good grades to female students after their sexual assault. In jobs, females involved in such type of illicit activities and involved with the management get all kind of benefits of increments; increase in salaries, courses abroad, promotions and in some cases female faculty was awarded PhD degrees even when their research work was not up to the mark and rejected by external supervisors.

29- Parent’s input for improvement of education system at all levels

Parents should be involved at all education levels to maintain the high standards of education and learning.

30- Cost of education

The economic cost is higher in private schools and they are located in rich localities only though they provide better quality of education. Public schools ensure equitable access but low-quality education.

31- Cultural constraints and traditional taboos

Due to cultural constraints and traditional taboos parents prefer early marriages of their girls instead of sending them to schools. Similarly, mothers feel comfortable when girls stay home and help mothers in baby sitting and finishing household chores. In some of the areas only boys are sent to schools considering them as head of the future families and girls are asked to learn some family skills like embroidery, weaving, pottery or for cattle care.

32- Illiteracy of parents and parental concerns

Due to non – availability of Education and lack of awareness poor parents have number of children in the hope that they will become their earning hands and instead of sending them to school their mothers working in different houses as domestic help take them along for the baby sitting of the children of theses houses and demand money for that. They think that investing girls will be of benefit to the in laws or her husband since they will not get any return from it so its better as long as girls are staying in their homes they should earn and bring money for the family.

33- Learning crisis:

The education system is not producing students who are learning from education as per the requirement of the standard in which they are studying. Maybe a student studying in class five does have the knowledge of class two or three only. This Learning Crisis has become the biggest issue of our current education system. It means there is wide gap between school input and school output.

34- Distance:

There are many schools which are far from some of villages and there are no means of transportation and children have to walk on foot to reach schools miles away from their homes which is not possible for girl students to do as parents do not want to send their girls unattended and do not accompany them since they have to work to meet both ends.

Recommendations:

• Budget allocation should be increased as per international standards of education.
• Schools should be shifted on solar system to handle the issue of load shedding.
• Pupil teacher, pupil school and teacher school ratios should be balanced and class strength, teacher’s number and number of classrooms should be in accordance to the international education standards.
• Boundary walls should be made. Security staff should be hired, CCTV cameras should be installed, student teacher and staff should be issued identity cards.
• For teacher training and development quality professional institutes with sufficient funds should be set up.
• Political and bureaucratic influence should be minimized at all educational levels.
• The system of accountability should be strengthened and all associated in education system are trained to own responsibilities both at individual and collective basis.
• Curriculum should be revised on annual basis and new strategies and methods should be incorporated to align our education system with other countries.
• Examination system should be made free of unfair means, Mafia culture and illegal gratification. Supervision and monitoring should be strong to subside this element.
• Policies should be implemented with delay and in continuity to get their outcomes.
• The culture of research should be promoted in the educational institutions.
• There should be Academia industrial linkage programs to make our education practical and our students capable of absorption in the job market.
• Introduction of technical and vocational trainings at secondary schools.
• Increasing public expenditure on education and skill generation from 2.7% of GDP to 5% of GDP and then to 7% of GDP.
• Reduce polarization and try to introduce uniform standards at all types of schools.
• Enhance the scale and quality of education in general and the scale and quality of scientific/technical education in Pakistan in particular.

Conclusion:

Sense education is developing not only mind but it also cleans and grooms our body and soul. We not only get education for economic reason but to handle social, political, psychological, ethical, legal and spiritual issues of our life. Education turns a raw human into a polished human being which becomes human capital of any nation and key to the development of that country. With education many countries are ruling the world and have become leaders in the comity of nations. The current system has made our younger generation direction directionless and uncertain about their future so they are leaving Pakistan and settling down in developed countries. The lawlessness, fear of loss of life, terrorist attacks, unemployment, inflation, exchange rate fluctuation, overpopulation, poverty, taxes and IMF loans are producing forces of degree holders without any vision, mission, critical thinking, reflection, analysis, research and creativity. Our outdated curriculum is pushing our youth towards stone age instead of directing them towards the fast-changing technology driven world. Traditional teaching is giving theoretical knowledge to students but practical learning is missing.

Finally, education reforms are the only solution to change the existing education system so following recommendations are suggested for the policy makers, thinkers, researchers, educationists and common people. Hope it will add value in the research and development of both student and teachers.

References:

• http://library.aepam.edu.pk/Books/Pakistan%20Education%20Statistics%202017-18.pdf
• https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED570671.pdf
• https://contentgenerate.com/problems-of-education-sector-solutions-pakistan-content-generate/
• https://www.finance.gov.pk/survey/chapter_22/PES10-EDUCATION.pdf
• https://ipripak.org/education-system-of-pakistan-issues-problems-and-solutions/
• https://www.morenews.pk/real-issues-education-system-pakistan/
• Zaki W. M., “Evaluation of Education Plans and Projects”, Islamabad, National Book Foundation, 1989.
• Save the Children & UNICEF “Disciplining The Child Practices and Impacts”, NWFP: School & Lietarcy Department, 2005.
• Rehman H. and Khan N., “The flaws in Pakistan’s Education System”, Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, vol/issue: 4(1), 2011.
• Louis D. H., “The crises of Education in Pakistan”, Lahore, Vanguard Book Ltd., 1987.
• Iqbal M., “Education in Pakistan”, Lahore, Aziz publishers, 1981.
• Qurashi I. H., “Education in Pakistan”, Karachi, Ma,aref LTD, 1975.
• Sayan, Fida, and Hussain, “Pakistan existing education system”, 2008. Retrieved from Retrieved from www.eric.articles/pak/edu on dated 2012, July 18.
• Naseem J. Q., “Problem of Education in Pakistan”, Karachi, Royal Book Company, 1990.
• Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Education. “National Assessment Findings”, Islamabad, National Education System, 2006.
• Ahmed, Iqbal.,” Critical Analysis of the Problems of Education in Pakistan: Possible Solutions”, . International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE) Vol.3, No.2, June 2014, pp. 79~84 ISSN: 2252-8822.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

• Pakistan Today
• Profit Magazine
• Paperazzi Magazine

A tale of two arrest warrants

Navigating the energy crisis amid global warming, pakistan’s armed forces’ contribution to un peacekeeping, return of the king, lying on tables not allowed, ch ashiq elected as chairman of apnsf, traffic comes to standstill in lahore as car drives in opposite…, fathers and sons, us says it will not change its policy regarding israel despite…, china issues report on u.s. human rights violations in 2023, king charles sends powerful message to commonwealth after meghan, harry’s nigeria…, india’s space startup calls off maiden rocket launch for a fourth…, israel carries out fresh strikes in rafah, shaheen afridi jumps up in latest icc t20i rankings, gautam gambhir likely to be indian squad’s new head coach: report, third t20 match between pakistan and england washed out, cristiano ronaldo in trouble, faces anti-doping committee, rain might interrupt another pakistan-england t20i, struggling higher education institutions in pakistan: urgent need to take innovative measures, increase allocation of budget.

By Prof. Dr. Muhammad Suleman Tahir

Education serves as a key driving force envisioned to turn the dream of a knowledge-based economy into reality and it also contributes to the attainment of social goals of humanity, creating cohesiveness, and building good human beings. Moreover, it has been playing a phenomenal role in the development of nations, in the form of public good, enlightening individuals with cultural values, norms, and national interests, and enabling them to serve humanity. Traditionally, it has been considered a public good, benefiting not only the individuals who got an education but the whole society in terms of its huge returns to society.

This standpoint about higher education has been a dominant school of thought regarding the functions and role of higher education as a public good, and it was considered a basic human right in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Education is an investment in the future as it brings numerous economic and social benefits to individuals and societies. Usually measured in relation to a nation’s wealth, expenditure on education largely comes from public budgets, but it includes funding from individual students, their families and other private sources as well.

According to UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS), Pakistan invests annually 2.4% of its GDP in Education which is less in comparison to India which is 4.5%, Korea’s 4.7%, Japan’s 3.4%, China’s 3.6%, UAE’s 3.9 % and Africa on an average 3.8 %. For a developing country research & development activities in higher education institutions are very important because it is necessary to create new knowledge as well as to find solutions to indigenous problems. But in Pakistan, higher education institutions and universities require creative and innovative solutions for their economic survival. Commonly the annual budget allocation is not sufficient to fulfil the research & development needs of universities.

If the government increases the annual budget for higher education and consumes it to raise the standard of education and research then Pakistani universities will lead in the world and would become a choice for students from the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia. Such foreign admissions will be helpful to generate funds. Once the cycle starts then it will continue by itself. No doubt, improving higher education in Pakistan requires a comprehensive approach that addresses various aspects of the education system.

It is urgent and the need of time to allocate a higher percentage of the national budget to higher education. Adequate funding can help improve infrastructure, faculty development, research facilities, and student support services. Strengthen the quality assurance mechanisms to ensure that institutions maintain high standards of education. Implement rigorous accreditation processes and periodic evaluations to identify areas for improvement.

Invest in professional development programs for faculty members to enhance their teaching skills, research capabilities, and expertise in their respective fields. Encourage faculty members to pursue higher degrees and engage in research activities.

Establish research centers and allocate resources for research grants to promote a culture of innovation and knowledge creation. Encourage collaboration between academia, industry, and government to address real-world challenges. Regularly review and update the curriculum to align it with current industry needs and global trends. Include practical skills development, experiential learning opportunities, and interdisciplinary approaches to equip students with relevant knowledge and skills.

Foster partnerships between higher education institutions and industries to bridge the gap between academic knowledge and practical skills. Encourage internships, industrial projects, and joint research initiatives to promote applied learning. Upgrade technological infrastructure and provide access to digital resources, research databases, and online learning platforms. Establish state-of-the-art laboratories, libraries, and other necessary facilities to support teaching and research.

Increase the number of universities, colleges, and specialized institutions to accommodate a larger student population. Enhance scholarship programs, financial aid, and outreach initiatives to ensure access for deserving students from all socio-economic backgrounds. Improve institutional governance, accountability, and transparency to ensure effective management of resources and maintain high ethical standards. Establish clear policies and procedures to promote fairness and meritocracy.

Foster an entrepreneurial mindset among students by offering incubation centers, startup support, and entrepreneurship courses. Encourage students to develop their own ventures and contribute to the economic growth of the country. Facilitate student and faculty exchanges with international institutions to promote cultural understanding, global perspectives, and knowledge sharing. Promote gender equality in higher education by creating an inclusive environment and providing opportunities for female students and faculty. Encourage women’s participation in STEM fields and leadership roles.

No doubt, an increase in the higher education budget is the need of time otherwise it will cause a loss in research and educational paradigm in Pakistan. Implementing the above recommendations will require a collective effort from the government, educational institutions, industry stakeholders, and civil society. Continuous monitoring, evaluation, and adaptation of strategies are necessary to ensure long-term improvements in higher education in Pakistan.

The author is Vice Chancellor of Khwaja Fareed University of Engineering and Information Technology, Rahim Yar Khan.

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

RELATED ARTICLES

Elevate government schools, accountability, only regret is trusting general bajwa: imran khan in exclusive interview from jail, khawar maneka beaten up by pti lawyers outside sessions court, brad pitt all set to share big screen with george clooney after 16 years.

• Privacy policy

• High contrast
• Work with us
• Press Centre

Search UNICEF

Giving every child the right to education.

Pakistan is facing a serious challenge to ensure all children, particularly the most disadvantaged, attend, stay and learn in school. While enrollment and retention rates are improving, progress has been slow to improve education indicators in Pakistan. 

An estimated 22.8 million children aged 5-16 are out-of-school.

Currently, Pakistan has the world’s second-highest number of out-of-school children (OOSC) with an estimated 22.8 million children aged 5-16 not attending school, representing 44 per cent of the total population in this age group. In the 5-9 age group, 5 million children are not enrolled in schools and after primary-school age, the number of OOSC doubles, with 11.4 million adolescents between the ages of 10-14 not receiving formal education. Disparities based on gender, socio-economic status, and geography are significant; in Sindh, 52 percent of the poorest children (58 percent girls) are out of school, and in Balochistan, 78 percent of girls are out of school.

Nearly 10.7 million boys and 8.6 million girls are enrolled at the primary level and this drops to 3.6 million boys and 2.8 million girls at the lower secondary level.

Gender-wise, boys outnumber girls at every stage of education.

Gaps in service provision at all education levels is a major constraint to education access.  Socio-cultural demand-side barriers combined with economic factors and supply-related issues (such as availability of school facility), together hamper access and retention of certain marginalized groups, in particular adolescent girls. Putting in place a credible data system and monitoring measures to track retention and prevent drop-out of out-of-school children is still a challenge.

At systems level, inadequate financing, limited enforcement of policy commitments and challenges in equitable implementation impede reaching the most disadvantaged. An encouraging increase in education budgets has been observed though at 2.8 percent of the total GDP, it is still well short of the 4 percent target.

In order to accelerate progress and ensure the equitable expansion of quality education, UNICEF supports the Government of Pakistan’s efforts to significantly reduce the number of OOSC at pre-primary, primary and lower secondary levels. Our education programme is focusing on Early Childhood Education (ECE) to improve school readiness; expansion of equitable and quality alternative learning pathways (ALP) at basic education levels; and nurturing of school-community linkages to increase on-time enrolment, reduce drop-outs, and ensure completion and transition for all students. At systems levels, we are contributing to more equity-focused provincial sector planning and budgeting; strengthening data and assessment systems; and evidence-based policy advocacy.

Early Childhood Education (ECE)

Investment in quality early learning/pre-primary education so that young children are ‘ready for school’ has high positive impacts on primary school enrolment, survival and learning, and is cost-effective.

The benefits of ECE are highest for children from poor and vulnerable households.

Given the limited reach and inequities in the provision of pre-primary education, Pakistan is increasingly recognizing early learning as a policy priority, and several provinces have already developed ECCE policies, plans, and standards.

Alternative Learning Pathways (ALP)

While several models exist for ALPs, these are still scattered and limited in scale. UNICEF is addressing the issue of OOSC through studies, supporting provincial sector plan development, development or review of non-formal education policy and direct programme implementation. This wealth of experience now provides the evidence, know-how, and momentum for UNICEF to support federal and provincial governments in broadening ALPs within education systems to bring OOSC into primary education, with a specific focus on adolescent girls.

School-Community Linkages

Socio-cultural demand-side barriers combined with economic factors together drive education deprivation for certain groups of children in Pakistan, particularly girls. These barriers are further exacerbated by a lack of parental awareness of early learning, importance of on-time enrolment, and lack of social protection schemes. UNICEF is therefore focusing more closely on the obstacles to on-time enrolment, retention, completion and transition.

Equity in Education

Equity-based investments by government continue to be the key way to ensure education systems include the most disadvantaged girls and boys. Considering insufficient and ineffective allocation of budgets, UNICEF strategically engages in sector planning, to capitalise on opportunities to influence decision-making on equity issues.

UNICEF’s growing technical capacity and focus on assessment of learning, and international expertise also provides an opportunity to add value to Pakistan’s efforts to improve assessment systems. System reforms help in improving accountability and evidence-based decision making. UNICEF supports healthy dialogue on education budgeting and public financing, to highlight areas of improvement for better planning and improvement in the education sector.

World's Largest Lesson 2021

Early Childhood Education 

New home, new friends

I wish I was

It's my kite

Can we be friends?

Saying Goodbye

Living and learning together

Choti's Adventures

Reports and Data

Pakistan Education Statistics 2016-17

Out of School Children in Azad Jammu & Kashmir Report , UNICEF, December 2016

  Out of School Children in Azad Jammu & Kashmir, Fact Sheet , UNICEF, December 2016

Out of School Children in Gilgit-Baltistan Report , UNICEF, December 2016

Out of School Children in Gilgit-Baltistan, Fact Sheet , UNICEF, December 2016

Review of Alternative Learning Programmes in Pakistan 2014-15

Simulations for Equity in Education (SEE) Balochistan Model Factsheet , UNICEF, December 2016

Social Cohesion and Resilience booklet

Access to Education and Social Cohesion in Pakistan-Summary of findings from End line survey , UNICEF, December 2017

Pakistan OOSC Study. UNICEF, 2013

South Asia Regional Study on OOSC. UNICEF, 2014

The Investment Case for Education and Equity. UNICEF, 2015

Today's Paper | May 29, 2024

Varsity teachers to observe black day to protest cut in hec budget.

LAHORE/TOBA TEK SINGH: The Federation of All Pakistan Universities Academic Staff Association (FAPUASA) on Tuesday announced to observe a black day on May 30 (Thursday) at all universities of the country in protest against the huge cut in the budget of the federal Higher Education Commission (HEC).

The federal government has issued a notification to reduce the budget of the HEC for the financial year 2024-25 from Rs65bn to Rs 25bn and it has been limited to only federal area universities though earlier it used to include provincial universities in its budget.

Earlier, the HEC had sought Rs126bn for more than 160 public universities in the country.

The FAPUASA executive council’s emergent meeting was held on Tuesday chaired by its President Dr Amjad Abbas Magsi while General Secretary Dr Muhammad Uzair moderated the proceedings.

The meeting was called to discuss the recent notification of the federal government where it had refused to allocate funds for the universities in the provinces. The participants took stock of the severity of the decision and rejected it unanimously due to its devastating effects on the higher education sector, which is already suffering a lot due to the apathy of the government.

Centre reduces HEC budget from Rs65bn to Rs25bn; VCs fear the move to force varsities to shut down

The council unanimously decided to observe a black day on May 30 (Thursday) in all universities of the country to record a protest against the decision of the federal government.

The academic staff associations (ASAs) of all the universities were directed to hold meetings and bring all the stakeholders along to raise the common voice. The federation also decided to hold a sit-in in Islamabad next week for the legitimate rights of the universities.

Being the representative of the academic community across all universities in Pakistan, FAPUASA President Mr Magsi and General Secretary Uzair vehemently condemned the federal government’s unilateral decision to remove the provincial universities from its budget.

They said that the decision was not only detrimental but also beyond the constitutional authority of the federal government. Any decision regarding the budget of the HEC must be placed before the Council of Common Interests (CCI) meeting, as mandated by the constitution.

They said the issue of the higher education budget was extremely crucial which affected the entire nation and the government must allocate funds in accordance with the provincial shares before making any cuts to the HEC budget. They said that the federal government’s decision to cut the HEC budget would lead to the destruction of universities across provinces, many of which were already facing severe financial challenges.

The federation representatives said that the federation, along with its provincial chapters, continuously raised its voice through the press, video messages and letters to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and also organised protests but the government showed lack of seriousness in addressing the conditions of the universities. They said that higher education was playing a pivotal role in the economic development of a country and undermining the sector would have long-term detrimental effects on the nation’s progress and prosperity.

The FAPUASA demanded the government immediately withdraw its decision regarding the cut in the HEC budget.

Moreover, the executive council of the federation urged the government to increase the higher education budget by up to Rs500bn in the upcoming federal budget.

The council said failure to reverse the decision would result in the closure of universities nationwide as most institutions would be unable to pay salaries and pensions.

The council said the federal government’s budget cuts for universities would create a significant challenge, especially for provinces like Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan as both these provinces did not establish their provincial higher education commissions (HECs).

It said these provinces lacked localised governance and strategic oversight necessary to mitigate the impact of reduced funding without the provincial HECs. The council said these institutions might need to enhance their efforts in securing research grants and donations while also advocating for interim support from the federal HEC to ensure continuation of educational standards and development projects.

The FAPUASA council hoped that the government would reverse the adverse decision and ensure that all constitutional formalities were fulfilled before making any decisions affecting the budget of universities. The council said the future of the higher education system and the country would depend on it.

Meanwhile, the Vice Chancellors Committee has also requested the federal government to continue extending support to the universities across the country as head of the federation, urging the provincial governments to make their contribution to their respective budgets for the universities.

The VCs Committee held an emergency online meeting in the wake of the reports of a major cut to the HEC funding for the Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget.

A press release said on Tuesday that chaired by UAF VC Dr Iqrar Ahmed Khan, also chairman of VCs committee, the forum was attended by the VCs and rectors of all the public sector universities. The universities’ heads emphasised that the government must pay due importance to higher education sector in its efforts through ‘ Education Emergency ’ in the country.

{try{this.style.height=this.contentWindow.document.body.scrollHeight+'px';}catch{}}, 100)" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="height:250px;position:relative" src="https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1830497" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-scripts allow-popups allow-modals allow-forms">

They said the government’s plan to cut the HEC’s recurring budget to Rs25bn for 2024-25 against Rs65bn in the previous financial year would jeopardise the future of students as the universities were already suffering a shortfall of Rs60bn.

In his remarks, Dr Iqrar said the report of government’s plans to cut the HEC funds for the Year 2024-25 had sent shockwaves throughout the academic community as any such move would force the public sector universities to shut down. He expressed his apprehension that the already financially strapped universities would not be able to survive and the future of Pakistani youth would be jeopardised if the federal government stopped giving required funds.

Expressing their views, the VCs of different universities said the provincial governments should make a contribution to the universities’ finances; however, the federal government must continue extending financial support to universities in the provinces for the cause of national development, integration and unity. They termed adequate budgetary allocation to higher education a matter of national interest, expressing fears that any cut in the HEC budget would put the students’ future in danger.

Appreciating the HEC’s role in the development of higher education sector across the country, they said any cut to the HEC budget was tantamount to making it dysfunctional. They said it was impossible to administer and operate universities without finances, adding that the universities’ survival lay in the government’s support to the HEC.

HEC Chairman Dr Mukhtar Ahmed and HEC Executive Director Dr Ziaul Qayyum said the commission would take up the issue with the finance ministry and request for reconsideration of the matter with a sympathetic view.

They asserted that any cut to the HEC budget would put all the investments made in the higher education sector in the last over two decades in jeopardy. The federal and provincial governments must jointly put their contributions to end the crises facing the universities, they emphasised.

They said the federal government’s funding for the higher education sector was a must to strengthen its efforts for national integration through youth.

Published in Dawn, May 29th, 2024

Civic education in varsities stressed

Fapuasa demands rs500bn education budget, rs50billion funds sought for varsities.

دبئی پراپرٹی لیکس میں سابق فوجی افسران کی جائیدادیں بھی شامل

دبئی لیکس: ریت پر محلات بنانے والی پاکستانی شخصیات

کون سے ممالک اسرائیل کو ہتھیار فراہم کرتے ہیں؟

Why Does Pakistan Mark Youm-e-Takbeer On May 28?

Inside Story Of NAB Raid On Rawalpindi Office Of Bahria Town

Budget 2024–25: Govt Considers Withdrawing Tax Waivers For The Rich

How Did World React To Israel’s Attack On Rafah Tent Camp?

Can Israel Face Consequences For Defying ICJ Ruling?

Indian Election: The Pakistani Connection

Women Make Up Less Than 20% Of Top Earners In Finance Sector

Bringing Paddle Tennis To Pakistan

Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.

Latest Stories

LHC to hear PTI plea against Punjab govt’s approval of more cases against Imran, party leaders

Karachi sizzles on hottest day of the year as temperature soars to 41.5°C

Gillespie says Pakistan have nothing to lose at World Cup 2024, need to play aggressive cricket

Young Afghan side among the favourites for T20 World Cup, claims opener Atal

Inflation to hover around 13.5-14.5pc in May: finance ministry

Missing poet Ahmed Farhad Shah in Kashmir police custody, IHC told

‘Proud Palestinian’ Bella Hadid highlights the keffiyeh to show her beautiful culture

‘The whole of India is silent’ — Saheefa Jabbar Khattak slams Bollywood’s silence on Palestine

Nicki Minaj fined and released after arrest in Amsterdam for carrying ‘soft drugs’

Most popular.

Budget 2024-25: Govt considers proposal to withdraw tax waivers for the rich

IHC overrules office objection to PTI petition on office razing

Teenage hiker’s body located in ditch on Margalla Hills trail after extensive search: police

Cartoon: 28 May, 2024

Upcountry areas to get rain as heatwave sweeps southern parts

England captain Buttler to miss third Pakistan T20 for birth of child

PM Shehbaz declares public holiday on May 28 to observe Youm-i-Takbeer

Why Modi claims he has won

Protesters begin march against Pak-Iran border closure

Editorial: It is mature of the KP govt to set aside its differences for the good of its people

Case of the missing poet

‘Demolition of my life’: Chronicling the horrors of forced evictions in Pakistan

Some may see voting for Donald Trump as something they simply cannot do

Special report: Going nuclear 1990-1993/1997-1999

The approaching verdict

World War III?

Termination limits

Old assumptions, new reality

First steps

Rafah inferno.

Afghan puzzle

Attacking minorities, persistent scourge, islamabad safe city’s online system shut down after hacking attempt.

Today's Paper | May 29, 2024

University teachers to observe black day to protest cut in HEC budget

Zamfara plans 25-30% budget vote for education

Z amfara State Governor, Dauda Lawal, has reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to prioritising education, describing it as a key enabler of social mobility and opportunities.

Speaking at the third and fourth combined convocation ceremony of the Federal University Gusau, Lawal announced plans to increase the allocation to the education sector in the state’s budget, aiming to reach the recommended 25-30% allocation as soon as possible.

A statement by Lawal’s spokesperson, Sulaiman Bala Idris, said that the governor also announced his government’s decision to give scholarship award to the overall best-graduating studentn of the university

“We have allocated a substantial amount of money to the education sector in our 2024 appropriation and are hopeful to jack up the allocation to a higher level in 2025, 2026 and 2027,” the Governor said last Saturday.

Lawal highlighted his administration’s efforts to revitalise the education sector

He stated, “We hope to achieve the 25-30 per cent recommended allocation to education as soon as possible.

“With reasonable allocation to the sector and efficient management of the resources, we are optimistic that we will revive the education infrastructure, hire more competent teachers and train and retrain existing ones.

“We will also increase enrolment in both primary and post-basic schools through public enlightenment and the creation of better learning and teaching environments.

The governor emphasised that education is free in Zamfara State and expressed his government’s intention to make it compulsory.

“Within our limited resources, we will continue to render helping hands to the Federal University Gusau.

“Our objective is to increase education in our state so that there is access and space for all our young people to be trained to attain the lofty heights that education provides,” the statement concluded.

First Look: Understanding the Governor’s 2024-25 May Revision

May 2024 | By California Budget & Policy Center

• Table of Contents
• Our Statement on the May Revision
• Event registration: Examining the Governor’s 2024-25 May Revision

Introduction

Governor Gavin Newsom released a summary of the May Revision to his proposed 2024-25 California state budget on May 10, projecting a $44.9 billion shortfall, or $27.6 billion shortfall, when taking into account early budget action taken by the legislature in April to reduce the shortfall by $17.3 billion. While many of the details are forthcoming, the governor proposes to close the budget gap through the partial use of reserves, spending cuts, and delays or deferrals of spending authorized in earlier years. While the $201 billion General Fund spending plan would protect many investments made in prior years, it also includes cuts and delays to programs and services that affect the day-to-day lives of Californians, particularly foster youth, Californians with disabilities, immigrant communities, students, and families with young children. Notably, the administration’s strategy demonstrates continued resistance to adopting long-term revenue solutions, putting corporate profits over families. This shortsighted approach exacerbates wealth inequality, stalls progress, and undermines the governor’s vision of a California for all.

WHat is the May Revision?

Released on or before May 14, the May Revision updates the governor’s economic and revenue outlook; adjusts the governor’s proposed expenditures to reflect revised estimates and assumptions; revises, supplements, or withdraws policy initiatives that were included in the  governor’s proposed budget  in January; and outlines adjustments to the minimum funding guarantee for K-14 education required by  Proposition 98 (1988) .

The rapid shift from a budget surplus, as was the case in recent fiscal years, to the budget shortfall we face today, is a lingering effect of the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on the economy. The projected budget shortfall is primarily the result of state revenue collections that the administration now projects are $12.5 billion lower over the three-year budget window (fiscal years 2022-23 through 2024-25) than was anticipated in the governor’s January proposal. The shortfall reflects the steep stock market decline in 2022 — after significant growth in 2020 and 2021 — that negatively impacted income tax collections from high-income Californians and corporations, as well as the economic dampening effects of the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes.

Lower state revenues over the three-year budget window result in automatic adjustments to constitutionally-required funding allocations, including to the state’s main reserve and education reserve accounts, as well as reduced funding for K-12 schools and community colleges.

The governor’s proposed solutions to cover the shortfall would partially draw down on various state reserves . The solutions include using $12 billion enacted through legislative early action in April, however, just $3.1 billion would be used in 2024-25, and $8.9 billion would be shifted to 2025-26. The administration also proposes draining the Safety Net Reserve ($900 million), withdrawing $2.6 billion from the Public School System Stabilization Account for education, and leaving an estimated $22.9 billion for future use.

The administration’s proposals include billions in cuts, delays, and deferrals of critical investments intended to improve the health and well-being of all Californians. Reductions that will disproportionately affect the lives of low-income communities, Californians of color, Californians with disabilities, and families with children include, among others:

• Ongoing cuts to CalWORKs for supportive services, home visiting, and mental health/substance abuse services (despite draining the Safety Net Reserve intended to be used to avoid cuts to CalWORKs) and a one-time cut in employment services,
• Cuts to programs that help address homelessness and provide affordable housing,
• Indefinitely delaying further expanding child care slots, 
• Various reductions in investments in behavioral health, including cuts to infrastructure, housing, workforce, and youth behavioral health initiatives,
• Cuts in ongoing support for public health and one-time investments in the health workforce, 
• Cuts to services for Californians who are undocumented, including ongoing support for the expansion of In-Home Support Services (IHSS) and delayed expansion of the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP),  
• Pulling back investments in transitional kindergarten (T-K) facilities and pre-kindergarten (pre-K) inclusivity of students with disabilities.

The revised budget also continues to utilize a controversial accounting maneuver to shift $8.8 billion in K-12 schools and community college (K-14) costs  — on paper — from 2022-23 to later fiscal years and pay for these delayed expenses using non-K-14 funds. 

The May Revision proposals would protect and maintain some progress made in prior budget years to help improve economic security and opportunities for Californians with low incomes and Californians of color, including expanding full-scope Medi-Cal coverage to all Californians, maintaining investments in cash assistance through the CalEITC, Young Child Tax Credit, and Foster Youth Tax Credit, and temporary rate increases for child care providers.

However, state leaders have the tools and resources to prevent other harmful cuts. By further tapping into the state’s main rainy day fund and permanently reducing tax breaks for profitable corporations, state leaders can ensure corporations pay their fair share and avoid cuts to services that help Californians stay healthy, housed, and put food on the table.

This First Look report outlines key pieces of the May Revision to the 2024-25 California budget proposal, and explores how the governor prioritized spending and determined cuts to balance the budget amid a sizable projected state budget shortfall.

Budget Overview

Economic Outlook : Revised Budget Projects Moderate Job and Wage Growth Revenue : Revised Budget Reflects Additional $12.5 Billion Downgrade in Revenue Outlook Tax Policy : Modified Tax Proposals Include Temporary Business Tax Break Limitations Reserves : May Revision Includes Withdrawal of Reserve Funds, Proposes New Fund to House “Excess Revenue”

Coverage, Affordability & Access : Governor Upholds Medi-Cal Expansion, Amends MCO Tax, Proposes Harmful Cuts Health Workforce: Revised Budget Severely Cuts Health Care Workforce Development Behavioral Health : Behavioral Health Initiatives Mostly Sustained, But New Cuts Proposed Public Health : Cuts to Public Health Leave Californians Vulnerable to Future Threats

Homelessness & Housing

Homelessness : May Revision Reduces Limited Funding for Homelessness Housing : May Revision Proposes Deeper Cuts for Affordable Housing

Economic Security

Overview: May Revision Proposes Alarming Cuts to Vital Safety Nets Refundable Tax Credits : Revised Budget Maintains Tax Credits for Californians with Low Incomes Refundable Tax Credits: Revised Budget Does Not Implement Workers’ Tax Credit Slated for 2024 CalWORKs : May Revision Proposes Additional Cuts to Critical CalWORKs Support Services Food Assistance : Governor Proposes Cuts and Delays to Previous Food Assistance Commitments Child Care : Governor Maintains Temporary Rate Increase, Pauses Slot Expansion Californians with Disabilities : Governor Protects SSI/SSP but Cuts Key Services for People with Disabilities Immigrant Californians : Proposal Eliminates and Delays Vital Services for Immigrant Californians, Maintains Cut to Legal Services Domestic Violence : Governor Does Not Provide Needed Support to Domestic Violence Survivors

Early Learning & Pre-K : Transitional Kindergarten Expansion Continues While Facilities are Cut Proposition 98 : K-14 Education’s Minimum Funding Level Drops Due to Lower Revenue Estimates K-12 Education : Budget Proposal Relies on Reserves to Support K-12 School Funding Formula Community Colleges : Revised Budget Increases Reserve Withdrawals for Community Colleges Funding CSU/UC : Revised Proposal Maintains Deferrals for the CSU and UC Systems Student Financial Aid : May Revision Abandons Commitments to Expand Student Financial Aid

Justice System

State Corrections : May Revision Calls for Deactivating Prison Housing Units, but Not Prison Closures Retail Theft : Revised Budget Continues to Provide Over $100 Million to Address Retail Theft Proposition 47 Investments : Revised Budget Estimates Proposition 47 Savings of $95 Million for Local Investments

Workforce & Climate Change

Other/General Workforce : Governor Proposes Additional Cuts to Several Workforce Programs Climate Change : Revised Budget Proposes Further Cuts to Prior Environment Commitments

virtual event

How does the governor’s administration navigate and prioritize spending in the face of a challenging fiscal landscape?

Join us for this free, virtual event on May 22.

Revised Budget Projects Moderate Job and Wage Growth

The administration’s economic outlook projects trends in major economic indicators that affect state tax collections and revenues in the budget. The revised outlook projects steady, but slowing national economic growth into next year, with California job gains expected to remain relatively weak through 2025. The number of nonfarm jobs in the state is forecast to increase by just 0.1% in 2024 and 0.4% in 2025, following a stronger increase of 0.9% in 2023 and 1.5% in 2019, just before the pandemic. California’s unemployment rate is projected to remain relatively higher in the near term as well: 5.2% in 2024 and 5.3% in 2025, up from 4.7% in 2023 and 4.1% in 2019. Wages and incomes are also expected to grow more slowly this year and next than just prior to and coming out of the pandemic downturn. The revised budget does not project a recession in the near term, but does note that if inflation remains elevated, the Federal Reserve could maintain higher interest rates which could slow economic activity by more than projected. 

While the administration’s outlook is useful for understanding how economic conditions might impact budget revenues, it’s also important to consider how economic conditions are affecting Californians with low incomes, who count on programs and services funded by the budget. In March 2024, the majority of California households with incomes under $25,000 (55%) reported having difficulty paying for basic needs like food, housing, and medical expenses, according to the most recent US Census Pulse survey. Black, Latinx, and other Californians of color, as well as households with children were more likely to struggle paying for basic expenses. The Census data from March also show that 42% of Black households with children and 32% of Latinx households with children did not have enough to eat , compared to 15% of white households with children. Among all households with children, about one-quarter (24%) had insufficient food. In addition, the latest Census data show that California continues to have the highest poverty rate of the 50 states based on the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which provides a more accurate picture of poverty by accounting for differences in the cost of housing across communities. Housing costs in California typically exceed costs in the rest of the nation, and rents have risen sharply in many parts of the state in recent years making it difficult for Californians with low incomes to afford housing .

Revised Budget Reflects Additional $12.5 Billion Downgrade in Revenue Outlook

The governor’s revised proposal is based on an updated revenue estimate for the three-year budget window spanning fiscal years 2022-23 through 2024-25. After lower-than-expected tax collections since the governor’s January proposal, the administration now expects General Fund revenues to be about $12.5 billion lower over that window than the January estimate. This is before taking into account loans and transfers, the governor’s revenue proposals, and other budget solutions ( see Tax Proposals section ).

The administration continues to have a more optimistic revenue outlook than the Legislative Analyst’s Office, which recently projected that the three-year total of the “Big Three” General Fund revenues sources — personal income taxes, corporate taxes, and sales taxes, which together make up the majority of General Fund revenues — could be around $19 billion lower than the governor’s January projection.

After accounting for automatic spending changes resulting from the lower revenue estimate, the governor estimates that the downgraded revenue outlook results in a $7 billion addition to the three-year state deficit the governor identified in January. 

The administration expects state revenue growth to generally return to the pre-pandemic pattern after the dramatic spike in revenues during the pandemic as the stock market surged and then subsequently corrected.

Modified Tax Proposals Include Temporary Business Tax Break Limitations

In January, the governor proposed a modest package of revenue solutions that included limiting the extent to which businesses can use prior-year losses to offset their taxable profits (“Net Operating Loss carryforwards”), eliminating oil and gas tax subsidies, and other minor tax changes. These revenue proposals made up less than 1% of the total budget solutions proposed in January.

The May Revision modifies the January revenue-related proposals by:

• Replacing the previous Net Operating Loss proposal with temporary business tax benefit limits.
• Clarifying existing law for how some multinational corporations calculate their taxable income in California.

The updated proposal would suspend the use of Net Operating Losses for businesses with state income above $1 million, and limit total business tax credits that a business can use in a single year to $5 million. The tax credit limit would exclude Low-Income Housing Tax Credits as well as Pass-Through Entity Elective tax credits. These limitations would be in effect for up to three years, beginning with the 2025 tax year, and could be eliminated if the administration determines that the revenue situation has improved sufficiently by the 2025-26 May Revision. The administration estimates these limitations would raise revenues by $900 million in 2024-25 and $5.5 billion in 2025-26.

The administration expects this proposal to raise $216 million in the budget window.

While temporary limitations on businesses’ ability to reduce their state income taxes help to address the deficit in the short-term, the governor’s revised proposal does little to increase state revenues on an ongoing basis and misses key opportunities to make the state’s tax system more fair. Policymakers should consider permanent limitations on business tax credits — as some states already do — to ensure that businesses are not paying next to nothing in state income taxes when they turn large profits. State leaders should also explore other options to permanently increase state revenues by making the corporate tax system more fair and eliminating or reforming other costly and inequitable tax breaks , which are not regularly considered as part of the budget process.

May Revision Includes Withdrawal of Reserve Funds, Proposes New Fund to House “Excess Revenue”

California has a number of state reserve accounts that set aside funds intended to be used for a “rainy day” when economic conditions worsen and state revenues decline. Some reserves are established in the state’s Constitution to require deposits and restrict withdrawals, and some are at the discretion of state policymakers.  

California voters approved Proposition 2 in November 2014 , amending the California Constitution to revise the rules for the state’s Budget Stabilization Account (BSA) , commonly referred to as the rainy day fund. Prop. 2 requires an annual set-aside equal to 1.5% of estimated General Fund revenues. An additional set-aside is required when capital gains revenues in a given year exceed 8% of General Fund tax revenues. For 15 years — from 2015-16 to 2029-30 — half of these funds must be deposited into the rainy day fund, and the other half is to be used to reduce certain state liabilities (also known as “budgetary debt”).

Prop. 2 also established a new state budget reserve for K-12 schools and community colleges called the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA) . The PSSSA requires that when certain conditions are met, the state must deposit a portion of General Fund revenues into this reserve as part of California’s Prop. 98 funding guarantee ( see Prop. 98 section ). In order to access the funds in the BSA and PSSSA, the governor must declare a budget emergency — an action that is not included in the May Revision or in the early budget action agreed to by the governor and Legislature in April, but will be necessary to access these funds.

The BSA and the PSSSA are not California’s only reserve funds. The 2018-19 budget agreement created the Safety Net Reserve Fund , which holds funds intended to be used to maintain benefits and services for CalWORKs and Medi-Cal participants in the event of an economic downturn. Additionally, the state has a Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties (SFEU) — a reserve fund that accounts for unallocated General Fund dollars and that gives state leaders total discretion as to when and how they can use the available funds.

The current-year (2023-24) budget, enacted in mid-2023, projected $22.3 billion in the BSA; $10.8 billion in the PSSSA; $900 million in the Safety Net Reserve; and $3.8 billion in the SFEU. However, revenue adjustments in the current year result in updated 2023-24 projections in the governor’s proposed budget — $22.6 billion in the BSA; $2.6 billion in the PSSSA; $900 million in the Safety Net Reserve; and a shortfall of $843 million in the SFEU, which fluctuates throughout the year based on changes in revenues.

In April 2024, the governor and legislative leaders agreed to an early action budget package to partially address the state’s budget shortfall that included drawing down $12 billion from the BSA, a proposal that was also included in the governor’s January budget proposal.

The May Revision:

• Includes the $12 billion withdrawal from the BSA, but spreads the withdrawal over the next two fiscal years — utilizing only $3.1 billion in 2024-25 and shifting $8.9 billion to 2025-26. 
• Withdraws all $900 million from the Safety Net Reserve, despite also proposing significant cuts to the CalWORKs program, a program the reserve is designed to protect ( see CalWORKs section ).
• Withdraws $5.8 billion from the PSSSA in 2023-24 and the remaining $2.6 billion in 2024-25.
• Projects a 2024-25 year-end SFEU balance of $3.4 billion.

In total, the May Revision proposes to withdraw less from the state’s rainy day funds for 2024-25 than the governor’s January proposal, despite the fact that the administration projects that the budget shortfall has increased since January. Taking into account the remaining reserves in the BSA and the SFEU, the governor’s May Revision projects total remaining reserves of $22.9 billion at the end of 2024-25, compared to $18.4 billion in the governor’s January proposal. 

Given that the administration’s approach to resolving the state budget shortfall includes an array of harmful cuts to vital programs and services that help Californians with low incomes, communities of color, and Californians with disabilities, state leaders appear to have additional room to responsibly draw upon reserves to protect those programs and also leave funds available to address future fiscal uncertainties.

New Fund to Capture “Excess Revenue”

The May Revision also signaled the administration’s intent to enact legislation to enable state leaders to save more during future upswings in revenue by requiring the state to set aside a portion of anticipated “surplus” funds — funds that exceed a yet-to-be-determined standard for historical trends. The administration notes that the funds would not be able to be committed until revenues have been realized. 

While the specifics of the governor’s proposal are not yet available, any efforts to set aside additional funds would likely interact with other constitutional requirements that affect state spending and reserves, including Prop. 4 (1979; the “Gann Limit”), Prop. 98 (1988), and Prop. 2 (2014). For instance, the administration notes that amendments would be needed to Prop. 2 to allow for increased deposits to the BSA. Any amendments to the constitutional provisions, however, would need to be approved by California voters.

State Budget Reserves Explained

See our report, California’s State Budget Reserves Explained , to learn more about the savings accounts policymakers can use to support Californians in times of budget shortfalls.

Governor Upholds Medi-Cal Expansion, Amends MCO Tax, Proposes Harmful Cuts

Access to health care is necessary for everyone to be healthy and thrive. About 14.5 million Californians with modest incomes — nearly half of whom are Latinx — are projected to receive free or low-cost health care through Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program) in 2024-25. Another 1.8 million Californians purchase health coverage through Covered California, the state’s health insurance marketplace. 

The May Revision maintains recent Medi-Cal expansions, but pulls back on other health care investments that were established in prior years. Specifically, the revised budget:

• Maintains the expansion of Medi-Cal eligibility to undocumented adults ages 26 to 49, but cuts $94.7 million to eliminate In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) for all undocumented Californians.
• Cuts $280 million for Equity and Practice Transformation Payments to Providers.
• Cuts $62 million from the Health Care Affordability Reserve Fund intended to reduce cost-sharing in Covered California.
• Eliminates the Indian Health Grant Program.
• Freezes funding levels for county administration of Medi-Cal eligibility.
• Eliminates acupuncture as an optional Medi-Cal benefit for adults.
• Eliminates $2 million in ongoing General Fund for free clinics.
• Does not provide funding to reform the Medi-Cal Share of Cost program.
• Does not provide funding to implement continuous coverage for children from birth to age five.

These services help Californians with low incomes who are over the age of 65, blind, and/or disabled live with dignity in their own homes. Under this revised spending plan, Californians would lose access to IHSS solely due to their immigration status. This proposal is both harmful and xenophobic, potentially pushing immigrant families deeper into poverty. These cuts could also lead to increased state spending on nursing home care in the long run. State leaders should not compromise home care for Californians simply due to their immigration status.

These grants to certain Medi-Cal providers were intended to improve quality, health equity, behavioral health integration, and primary care infrastructure. The May Revision maintains $70 million General Fund expenditures included in the 2022 Budget Act.

These funds are critical for Californians who are uninsured and struggling to purchase coverage as well as for those who are insured but can’t afford to access the care they need.

This aims to improve the health status of American Indians living in urban, rural, and reservation or rancheria​ communities throughout California. The May Revision proposes to reduce $23 million annually beginning in 2024-25 to eliminate this program.

This reflects a reduction of $20.4 million in 2024-25 and ongoing. This reduction occurs at a time when counties are processing a high volume of renewals and many Californians are losing Medi-Cal coverage .

The estimated reduced General Fund cost for this cut is $5.4 million in 2024-25 and $13.1 million ongoing. Acupuncture is performed to prevent, modify or alleviate severe, persistent chronic pain resulting from a medical condition.

This provides primary care, preventive health care, and additional health services to medically underserved Californians.

This would alleviate financial burdens for many older adults and people with disabilities. Under the current Medi-Cal Share of Cost program, which forces many Californians to choose between paying for their health care, rent, food, or other basic needs. This reform was passed in the 2022 Budget Act but was subject to future appropriation. 

California was one of the first states to pass a policy that would ensure that children under age five can keep their Medi-Cal coverage without administrative renewals. Funding is needed to start the necessary steps to implement this policy change.

The May Revise also amends the Managed Care Organization (MCO) tax revenue and expenditure proposal. The MCO tax is a provider tax imposed by states on health care services that essentially reduces, or offsets, state General Fund spending on Medi-Cal. The federal government approved the initial MCO tax proposal last year. In January, the administration proposed to increase the MCO tax and the May Revision proposes an additional amendment to the MCO tax to include health plan Medicare revenue, resulting in an additional $689.9 million in reduced General Fund costs in 2024-25, $950 million in 2025-26, and $1.3 billion in 2026-27. These changes would be subject to federal approval. Overall, the May Revision includes $9.7 billion in MCO tax funds over multiple years to support the Medi-Cal program. However, rather than using $6.7 billion of this amount to continue Medi-Cal provider rate increases, as originally planned, these funds will be used to offset General Fund spending. 

The May Revise does protect some health care investments that were established in prior years. Specifically, the budget:

• Sustains the ambitious Medi-Cal reform effort known as CalAIM (California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal).
• Maintains one-time $200 million ($100 million General Fund) in 2024-25 to support access to reproductive health services.
• Maintains commitment to eliminate the Medi-Cal asset test for seniors and people with a disability.

This was originally introduced in 2019. The main goal of this initiative is to better support millions of Californians enrolled in Medi-Cal — particularly those experiencing homelessness, children with complex medical conditions, children and youth in foster care, Californians involved with the justice system, and older adults — who often have to navigate multiple complex delivery systems to receive health-related services. Initial components of CalAIM launched in the beginning of 2022 and the remaining components will go live over the next several years.

The administration plans to develop a federal demonstration waiver that would support access to family planning services for Medi-Cal enrollees as well as strengthen the state’s reproductive health safety net. Access to reproductive health services, including contraceptive care, sexually transmitted infection prevention and treatment, obstetrical care, and abortion services, have a profound impact on the lives of women and pregnant people.

Specifically, the revised budget includes $112.2 million total funds ($56.1 million General Fund) in 2023-24 and $227.2 million total funds ($113.6 million General Fund) in 2024-25 for the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test which became effective on January 1, 2024.

Lastly, the May Revision includes directed payments to children’s hospitals and public hospitals. This includes an annual allocation of $230 million to support children’s hospitals, with half of these funds provided by the federal government and the remaining half sourced from the Medi-Cal Provider Payment Reserve Fund. 

Revised Budget Severely Cuts Health Care Workforce Development

Access to health care services is important for everyone’s health and well-being. The state’s workforce must meet the needs of Californians to achieve equitable access to timely and culturally competent health services. While state policymakers have made considerable investments in recent years to bolster the health workforce, investments in various health workforce areas still fall short. 

Despite the clear need to invest in the health workforce, the May Revision cuts over $1 billion over multiple years. This includes:

• $854.6 million General Fund across five years for various health care workforce initiatives.
• $189.4 million Mental Health Services Act Fund for behavioral health workforce programs.

This includes community health workers, nursing, social work, primary care education and training, and efforts to increase the number of underrepresented individuals in health professions. The May Revision proposes to cut $300.9 million in 2023‑24, $302.7 million in 2024-25, $216 million in 2025‑26, $19 million in 2026-27, and $16 million in 2027‑28 for these initiatives.

These cuts impact the social work initiative, addiction psychiatry fellowships, university and college grants for behavioral health professionals, expanding Master of Social Work slots, and the local psychiatry behavioral health program overseen by the Health Care Access and Information Department.

The May Revision also modifies previous plans to enhance Medi-Cal provider participation under the Managed Care Organization (MCO) tax proposal. While the revised budget maintains $727 million to increase provider rates for primary care, maternity care (including doulas), and non-specialty mental health services, it reallocates $6.7 billion previously intended for other health areas, including primary and specialty care in Medi-Cal, abortion and family planning access, clinics, and the Medi-Cal workforce pool. This redirection of funds towards existing Medi-Cal services is sensible in a budget deficit, but it raises concerns about the impact on timely access to health care services.

The health care workforce and access to health care services are intrinsically linked. If people cannot find a health care provider in their area or face extended wait times for an appointment, they do not have meaningful access to health care. State policymakers must continue to build a health care workforce that not only meets the needs of Californians but also mirrors the state’s diverse population in terms of race, ethnicity, sability, gender identity, and sexual orientation. Doing so will require sustained, ongoing investments, not cuts.

Behavioral Health Initiatives Mostly Sustained, But New Cuts Proposed

Millions of Californians who cope with behavioral health conditions — mental illness or substance use disorders — rely on services and supports that are primarily provided by California’s 58 counties. Improving California’s behavioral health system is critical to ensuring access to these services for all Californians, regardless of race, age, gender identity, sexual orientation, or county of residence. 

In recent years, state policymakers have launched various initiatives to transform California’s behavioral health system with the goal of improving access. Proposition 1 , the most recent of these initiatives, was approved earlier this year. Prop. 1 is a two-part measure that 1) amends California’s Mental Health Services Act and 2) creates a $6.38 billion general obligation bond to fund behavioral health treatment and residential facilities as well as supportive housing for veterans and Californians with behavioral health needs.

The May Revise includes some initial funding to begin Prop. 1 implementation, including:

• $126.9 million for the Department of Health Care Services in 2024-25.
• $85 million ($50 million General Fund) for county behavioral health departments.

Of this amount, $16.9 million is from the General Fund, $28.2 million is from the Behavioral Health Services Act Fund, $31.6 million is from the Opioid Settlement Fund, $10.4 million is from the Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond Act, and $39.8 million is from the federal government.

This provides mental health and substance use disorder services to Californians through Medi-Cal and other programs.

In the governor’s January budget proposal and the revised budget proposal, the administration maintains funding to continue behavioral health initiatives that state leaders launched in recent years. For instance, the revised budget sustains the Behavioral Health Community-Based Organized Networks of Equitable Care and Treatment (BH-CONNECT) Demonstration , which aims to improve mental health services for Medi-Cal members. The administration assumes that implementation of BH-CONNECT will begin on January 1, 2025. Major reforms to the Medi-Cal program as well as the level of federal funding provided must be negotiated with the federal government through the Medicaid waiver process. As such, implementation will depend on the availability of funding and federal approval.

However, the revised budget also proposes a series of cuts and delays to other behavioral health initiatives. Specifically, the revised budget:

• Eliminates $450.7 million one-time from the last round of the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure (BHCIP) Program.
• Reduces funding and modifies the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative.
• Cuts $132.5 million in 2024-25 and $207.5 million in 2025-26 for the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program.
• Cuts $126.6 million ongoing General Fund for CalWORKs mental health and substance abuse services, effectively eliminating this service.
• Cuts $61 million General Fund in 2024-25 and ongoing for the Naloxone Distribution Project and Medication Assisted Treatment.
• Includes $27.2 million General Fund in 2023-24 and $37.8 million General Fund in 2024-25 for Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act.

This program provides competitive grants to expand the community continuum of behavioral health treatment resources. The May Revision proposes to reduce BHCIP funding by $70 million General Fund in 2024-25 and $380.7 million General Fund in 2025-26. While BHCIP will receive Prop. 1 bond funds, these funds are inadequate to address the overarching need for state investments. ( See homelessness section. )

The spending reductions — $72.3 million in 2023-24, $348.6 million in 2024-25, and $5 million in 2025-26 — impact school-linked health partnerships, various grant programs, a public education campaign, and a youth suicide reporting and crisis response pilot program. Of this amount, the administration notes that $140 million General Fund proposed in 2024-25 to support a platform is no longer needed. The revised budget does maintain $9.5 million ($4.1 million General Fund) in 2024-25 to establish a Wellness Coach benefit in Medi-Cal, which the administration proposed in January. Effective January 1, 2025, these coaches will offer wellness education, screening, support coordination, and crisis management services to children and youth in schools and other behavioral health settings.

This program aims to address the immediate housing and treatment needs of people with serious behavioral health conditions who are also experiencing unsheltered homelessness. The administration notes that $90 million in Behavioral Health Services Act funding would be provided in 2025-26, resulting in a net reduction of $117.5 million for that year. ( See homelessness section. )

California has led the way in expanding CalWORKs support services, recognizing families often need additional support, like mental health and substance use treatment, to improve their well-being and address barriers to work. ( See CalWORKs section. )

Naloxone is a life-saving medicine that reverses an opioid overdose and Medication Assisted Treatment is treatment for a substance use disorder that includes medications along with counseling and other support.

This is a plan to establish court-ordered treatment for people experiencing both homelessness and serious behavioral health challenges. The revised budget adjusts estimated county funding to align with recent trends in utilization. 

Investing in the state’s behavioral health system is crucial for supporting Californians who are coping with mental health conditions or substance use disorders. State leaders should continue to invest in the behavioral health system and address the behavioral health workforce shortage. Policymakers can also invest in efforts to make sure that the behavioral health workforce better reflects the diversity of all Californians, including their gender identities and sexual orientations.

Cuts to Public Health Leave Californians Vulnerable to Future Threats

Everyone should have the opportunity to be healthy and thrive. The California Department of Public Health as well as local public health departments are vital in protecting and promoting Californians’ health and well-being. From improving living conditions to promoting healthy lifestyles to responding to infectious disease emergencies, public health workers are essential.

Despite this important responsibility, funding has not kept pace with the cost of responding to ongoing and emerging health threats. Many Californians suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic due to the state’s lack of preparedness. Communities of color experienced higher rates of illness and death due to historic and ongoing structural racism that deny many communities the opportunity to be healthy and thrive. Structural racism continues to underscore the need to address the root cause of health disparities through public health initiatives. 

In an alarming move, the governor’s revised budget proposes significant cuts to public health investments that were established in previous years. Specifically, the May Revision eliminates $52.5 million in 2023-24 and $300 million ongoing General Fund thereafter to improve public health infrastructure at the state and local level. Under this revised spending plan, local health jurisdictions would no longer continue to receive a minimum base allocation to support workforce expansion, data collection and integration, and partnerships with health care delivery systems and community-based organizations. At the state level, these cuts will reduce the capacity to assess and respond to current and emerging public health threats and will weaken key functions such as emergency preparedness and public health communications.

These cuts to public health capacities are short-sighted and harmful. After years of underinvestment in public health, these dollars provided much-needed infrastructure support. Given that public health emergencies and climate change disasters often disproportionately impact people with low incomes and communities of color, these cuts undo progress to advance health equity. State leaders should ensure that counties and cities have the capacity to address ongoing and future public health threats.

May Revision Reduces Limited Funding for Homelessness

Having a place to call home is core to living with dignity and health. Yet homeless service providers served over 330,000 Californians experiencing homelessness last year, underscoring both the need and increased capacity of the state’s response systems. Homelessness providers and localities are serving more individuals and families than ever before partially due to previous one-time state funding investments that provided critical resources for homelessness prevention and resolution services. Despite this, the May Revision proposes no new resources and reduces previous allocations, effectively leaving no significant state funding to address homelessness in 2024-25 or beyond. 

The May Revision proposes to eliminate $260 million in supplemental grant funds for the  Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention (HHAP) Grant Program in 2025-26, but maintains the last round of funding in 2023-24. HHAP is critical as it provides local jurisdictions with flexible funds to address homelessness in their communities in a variety of ways, ranging from rental and operating subsidies to acquiring shelter, interim and permanent housing beds, and street outreach, among other uses. The May Revision also changes previously proposed funding delays into funding cuts for various homelessness programs that serve diverse populations.

These funding reductions include:

• A reduction of $132.5 million in 2024-25 and $207.5 million in 2025-26 for the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program.
• A reduction of $80 million General Fund for the Bringing Families Home Program.
• A reduction of $65 million General Fund for the Home Safe Program.
• A reduction of $50 million General Fund for the Housing and Disability Advocacy Program.

This leaves  $132.5 million General Fund in 2024-25 and $117.5 million ($90 million Mental Health Services Fund and $27.5 million General Fund) in 2025-26. These funds help provide immediate housing for people experiencing homelessness who have a serious mental illness or substance use disorder ( see Behavioral Health section ).

Appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act, which serves families involved in the child welfare system.

Appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act, which supports the safety and housing stability of individuals involved in Adult Protective Services.

Appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act, which assists people experiencing or at risk of homelessness to connect with disability benefits and housing supports.

Also notable is the increased reduction of $450.7 million one-time from the last round of the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program (BHCIP), leaving $30 million one-time General Fund in 2024-25. This program provides competitive grants to expand the community continuum of behavioral health treatment resources ranging from wellness centers to psychiatric care facilities. BHCIP will be receiving $4.4 billion in bond funds through Proposition 1 , which voters approved in March 2024. The Department of Health Care Services is anticipated to open funding applications this summer and begin granting competitive awards by the fall ( see Behavioral Health section ). Prop 1. also restructures funds from the Mental Health Services Act, which exists separately from the state budget. It now requires counties to redirect 30% of these funds for housing interventions for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness with behavioral health conditions. However, these funds are inadequate to address the overarching need for state investments, as they focus solely on a specific subset of unhoused Californians.

May Revision Proposes Deeper Cuts for Affordable Housing

All Californians deserve a safe, stable, and affordable place to call home. However, many are blocked from this opportunity due to California’s affordable housing shortage and accompanying high housing costs. Renters, people with low incomes, Black and Latinx Californians, and undocumented Californians are especially likely to struggle to afford their homes . Yet despite noting California’s serious housing affordability challenges, the May Revision proposes deeper funding reductions and scarce new investments to affordable housing programs.

The administration now proposes $1.7 billion in General Fund reductions for various programs that support affordable housing development and homeownership . The May Revision reductions build on those in the January proposed budget . These include:

• An additional reduction of $236.5 million General Fund for the Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program in 2023-24 , bringing the total reduction to $474 million, which will eliminate the program.
• An additional reduction of $75 million General Fund for the Multifamily Housing Program , bringing the total reduction to $325 million General Fund, eliminating state funding in 2023-24.
• A newly proposed reduction of $127.5 million General Fund for the Adaptive Reuse Program , with $87.5 million from the 2023 Budget Act and $40 million from the 2022 Budget Act, which will eliminate the program. 
• An additional reduction of $35 million General Fund for the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program , with $25 million from 2023 Budget Act and $10 million from the 2022 Budget Act, eliminating state funding in 2023-24.
• An additional reduction of $26.3 million General Fund for the Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention Program from the 2022 Budget Act. The January proposed budget already fully reduced allocated state funds for this program in 2023-24.

The May Revision does reinstate an additional $500 million for state Low Income Housing Tax Credits – as has been done since 2019 – which help promote and finance affordable housing development. The administration also highlights Proposition 1 , approved by voters in March, as providing some funding for supportive housing programs. Prop. 1 provides roughly $2 billion in bond funds for the development of permanent supportive housing units specifically for Californians experiencing or at risk of homelessness with behavioral health needs (see Homelessness and Behavioral Health sections). Over half of these funds are designated for veterans. The Department of Housing and Community Development is anticipated to open applications for this funding at the end of 2024. However, these funds are specifically for supportive housing units and fall short in providing the diverse critical investments needed to continue meaningful, affordable housing development in California.

state budget terms defined

What’s the difference between a trailer bill and policy bill? A deficit and an operating deficit? And what exactly is a “Budget Bill Jr.?” Our Glossary of State Budget Terms answers that and more.

May Revision Proposes Alarming Cuts to Vital Safety Nets

While California has made significant investments in its social safety net in recent years, millions of people in communities across the state are still struggling to make ends meet as the cost of living continues to outpace incomes. Poverty, particularly among children and people of color, is on the rise. Despite this, the governor’s proposed budget includes very concerning cuts to vital safety net programs that may have devastating consequences for California families with the greatest needs. Cuts to the Department of Social Services, which administers the state’s safety net programs, total nearly $2 billion in the 2024-2025 fiscal year alone. These cuts target key investments in CalWORKs, food assistance, and child care. The budget proposal outright eliminates several critical support services for CalWORKs families, significantly reduces funding for program administration, and drains the dedicated reserves that were designed to protect the program from cuts.

Additionally, the proposal delays a long-awaited program expansion of food assistance to undocumented older adults and defunds a pilot to increase CalFresh benefits. In delaying and eliminating these vital services, which were small stepping stones to larger expansions that would close gaps in food insecurity across the state, the proposal would take California a step backward. In the child care space, the governor indefinitely delays his promised slot expansion despite the growing unmet need. Other cuts in this space would affect programs that serve foster youth and people with disabilities. 

California’s future largely depends on children whose entire lives will be shaped by the extent to which our state invests in their education, health, and well-being. But children cannot thrive unless their families thrive. Despite the budget shortfall, California’s leaders have a responsibility to ensure that our state’s children and families have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

Revised Budget Maintains Tax Credits for Californians with Low Incomes

California’s Earned Income Tax Credit (CalEITC), Young Child Tax Credit, and Foster Youth Tax Credit are refundable state income tax credits that provide tax refunds or reductions in state taxes owed to millions of Californians with low incomes, boosting their incomes and helping them to pay for basic needs like food. These credits also help to promote racial and gender equity by targeting cash to Californians of color, immigrants, and women who are frequently blocked from economic opportunities and forced into low-paying jobs that fail to provide economic security .

The administration maintains these tax credits in the revised budget while also continuing to cut funding for free tax preparation assistance, education, and outreach,  in half to $10 million in 2024-25, as proposed in January. These funds support community based organizations (CBOs) in their efforts to educate community members about state and federal refundable tax credits, connect eligible tax filers to free tax preparation services and assist tax filers in applying for or renewing Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, which some Californians must have in order to claim tax credits. Cutting this funding will reduce the capacity of CBOs to provide these services.

Revised Budget Does Not Implement Workers’ Tax Credit Slated for 2024

The 2022-23 budget included a new refundable tax credit for workers slated to become available in tax year 2024 if the Department of Finance determined that sufficient General Fund resources were available to support it. This credit was intended to help cover the cost of being a member of a labor union, particularly among workers with lower incomes who are typically excluded from an existing tax deduction for certain business expenses, including union dues. The administration does not include this new tax credit in the revised 2024-25 budget given the multi-year budget shortfall.

May Revision Proposes Additional Cuts to Critical CalWORKs Support Services

The California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program is a critical component of California’s safety net for families with low incomes. The program helps over 650,000 children and their families, who are predominantly people of color, with modest cash grants, employment assistance, and critical supportive services. The governor’s May Revision proposes deeply concerning cuts to CalWORKs administrative and program funding in addition to the significant cuts proposed in January.

The newly proposed cuts include:

• A one-time reduction of $272 million in 2024-25 for employment services under the single allocation funding.
• An ongoing reduction of $126.6 million for Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services, effectively eliminating this service. 
• An ongoing reduction of $47.1 million for the Home Visiting Program, which is designed to support positive health, development, and well-being of CalWORKs families with children under 2.

This amounts to a total cut of $445.7 million. Adding on to the cuts proposed in January , which totaled about $293 million in FY 24-25, this brings the total to about $739 million in cuts to CalWORKs, two-thirds of which would be ongoing. For many years, California has led the way in expanding CalWORKs support services, recognizing families have diverse needs and often need additional support to address barriers to work and improve their well-being. Taking programs away that offer mental health support, crisis intervention (Family Stabilization Program), and parenting support (Home Visiting Program), which research has shown can reduce or prevent the effects of adverse experiences for children, could jeopardize families’ ability to meet all program requirements and maintain access to their grants. Families not meeting strict program requirements will be at risk of punitive sanctions, which will only push them deeper into poverty. 

In addition to the proposed cuts, the governor’s budget does not include funding to redirect collected child support payments from the state back to former CalWORKs parents. For formerly assisted families, outstanding child support debt that is collected does not go to the families but rather goes to the state, county, and federal governments as “reimbursement” for the costs associated with the CalWORKs program.  Under this change , which was supposed to go into effect in April 2024, these families would have received an estimated annual total pass-through of $187 million annually.

Additionally, the governor proposes drawing down the full $900 million in the Safety Net Reserve, which was created to maintain existing CalWORKs and Medi-Cal benefits and services during an economic downturn ( see Reserves section ). While the governor does not propose cutting cash grants, given the projections of a sustained deficit in upcoming years, fully drawing down the reserve will leave CalWORKs vulnerable to additional cuts, similar to what occurred during the Great Recession . Closing the budget shortfall at the expense of families with low incomes is a short-sighted approach that could have detrimental effects on California’s economy and families facing the greatest needs.

Governor Proposes Cuts and Delays to Previous Food Assistance Commitments

All Californians should be able to put enough food on the table without having to go without other basic needs. But about 1 in 11 California households — and 1 in 8 California households with children — sometimes or often didn’t have enough to eat in March 2024, according to recent US Census Household Pulse data. In recent years, households have been hit with both rising food prices as well as the expiration of enhanced pandemic-era food benefits . 

CalFresh — California’s version of the federally funded Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — provides modest food assistance benefits to about 5.4 million Californians . The California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) is a state-funded program providing food benefits to certain non-citizens who are excluded from receiving federal  benefits, but undocumented immigrants are still excluded from CFAP benefits. The 2021-22 budget agreement included a plan to expand CFAP to Californians aged 55 and older who are excluded solely due to their immigration status. The expansion is currently set to begin in October 2025.

While the governor’s January budget proposal generally maintained prior commitments to  improve and expand the state’s food assistance programs, the May Revision proposes cuts and delays that would reverse or pause recent progress, including:

• Delaying the CFAP to include undocumented adults age 55 and older until 2027-28.
• Eliminating funding for the CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot Program.
• Eliminating the Work Incentive Nutrition Supplement Program (WINS) beginning in 2025-26.
• Eliminating all remaining $111.6 million for the Older Californians Act Modernization Funding for Senior Nutrition.

This means those older adults will continue to be excluded from vital food benefits for the next several years. The administration also has not put forth any plans to end this exclusion for undocumented Californians under age 55, even while 45% of undocumented Californians with low incomes are affected by food insecurity.

The 2023-24 budget created this pilot program and included $15 million one-time funding for 2024-25 to provide a state supplement to increase the minimum benefit for selected households to $50 for one year. This pilot program was a small step in acknowledging the inadequacy of the current minimum benefit of $23.

WINS is a $10 supplemental food benefit for some working CalFresh households. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that eliminating the program would reduce food benefits for around 125,000 households . The program is funded through CalWORKs but is only available for households not receiving regular CalWORKs benefits. The program was created with the primary goal of improving the CalWORKs Work Participation Rate (WPR), and it appears the proposal to eliminate WINS is a response to a recent federal law that would require the state to increase the supplement in order for it to continue helping the state achieve its WPR target, which could cost the state an additional $40 million each year. However, this elimination represents a loss of benefits for those households that rely on the additional assistance to keep food on the table, and the administration does not propose any relief for families to offset that loss.

The 2022 Budget Act included $186 million over three years to restore local services and supports for older adults that were reduced during the Great Recession; the 2023 Budget Act spread this funding out over five years instead of the original three years. This funding was intended to enable the local Area Agencies on Aging (AAAs) to continue to serve new meal participants brought on during the COVID pandemic. Taking away this funding could leave a gap in food access for a community struggling to stay housed and make ends meet .

Additionally, the budget does not include funding to implement Cal Grant reform, which would allow more college students to access CalFresh benefits ( see Financial Aid section ). The 2022 budget included a plan for Cal Grant reform, but it was subject to sufficient funds being available in 2024, so this was one of several “trigger” proposals included 2022 that will not be moving forward this year.

Finally, the budget includes $63 million in additional funding to implement the universal school meals program to account for an expected increase in the number of meals to be provided and a cost-of-living increase ( see K-12 Education section ). The $63 million is in addition to the increase included in the January proposal.

Governor Maintains Temporary Rate Increase, Pauses Slot Expansion

Thousands of families in California rely on subsidized child care and development programs administered by the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) as a critical resource for supporting their families to grow and thrive. While the state has made improvements to California’s child care system — most recently through reforming family fees and committing to an alternative methodology for child care provider reimbursements — the system is still falling short for many families and child care providers. For example, as of 2022, only one in nine children eligible for subsidized child care received services, despite growing demand. Moreover, the state released data this year showing that 73% of family child care providers do not pay themselves a salary. The administration therefore has an opportunity to advance progress toward creating an equitable child care system that meets the needs of all families and reflects the integral role of child care providers.

The governor’s revised budget:

• Pauses planned child care slot expansion at 119,000 new spaces.
• Maintains commitment to one-time funding for temporary subsidy rate increases but lacks a detailed plan for meeting federal deadlines to implement an alternative rate structure.
• Cuts funding for foster youth child care programs and support services.
• Includes $972 million in cost shifts to help ensure that unspent federal relief dollars are not reverted.

  In 2021-22, the governor committed to adding approximately 200,000 new child care slots by 2026-27. As of 2023-24, approximately 146,000 new slots were funded. Expansion was paused in 2023-24, and the state is still in the process of rolling out all intended new slots. Specifically, only about 119,000 new slots have been added. The revised 2024-25 budget paused slot expansion at this 119,000  “until fiscal conditions allow for resuming the expansion.” These proposed actions result in a reduction of $489 million in 2024-25 and $951 million in 2025-26 for subsidized child care slots. The April 24, 2024 Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services and Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Education Finance discussed the possibility of creating a “reversion account” that would keep unspent funds for slot expansion within child care. This reversion account to maintain unspent dollars within child care is not included in the 2024-25 revised budget.

The 2023-24 budget provided a total of nearly $1.4 billion in one-time funds for temporary rate increases for providers reimbursed through the California Department of Social Services (CDSS). The 2024-25 proposed budget maintains this one-time funding. This one-time funding is set to expire July 1, 2025, which is also the federal deadline determining the new rate structure, per the alternative methodology currently being developed. If the new provider rates are not determined by this deadline, they will revert back to the 2018 regional market rate or standard reimbursement rate. The administration remains committed to developing a single rate structure and alternative methodology for child care reimbursements. However, given the need for spending associated with the alternative methodology to be included in the 2025-26 budget process and Child Care Provider United union negotiations, the lack of a detailed plan (i.e., confirming a timeline for when state agencies produce cost estimates) makes the state more vulnerable to missing the federal deadline.

The Emergency Child Care Bridge Program for Foster Children (Bridge Program) is administered through CDSS. The Bridge Program provides time limited vouchers for child care and child care navigator services for foster care system families and parenting foster youth. The revised budget reduces funding for the Bridge Program, reflecting a reduction of $34.8 million in 2024-25 and $34.8 million in 2025-26. Additionally, the revised budget maintains proposed cuts to the Family Urgent Response System (FURS) by $30.1 million. FURS is a hotline for current or former foster youth and their caregivers to call and get immediate help for any issue they may be experiencing. 

The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) estimates that the state currently has $450 million of COVID-19 federal relief funds that may go unspent (set to expire September 30, 2024). Moreover, as of March 2024, the state had a Proposition 64 child care carryover balance of $296 million. The 2024-25 proposed budget plans to utilize all or a portion of these funds (among others) to offset General Fund costs for child care. Specifically, $596.8 will be shifted for 2023-24 and $375.5 will be shifted for 2024-25. This approach likely aligns with the LAO’s recommendation to minimize federal reversion of COVID-19 relief funds.

Governor Protects SSI/SSP but Cuts Key Services for People with Disabilities

All Californians should be included, supported, and treated with dignity in their communities, regardless of disability status. In California, people with disabilities can access several essential programs and services to manage their needs. The governor’s revised budget maintains a recent increase to the largest cash assistance program serving low-income Californians with disabilities, but builds on January’s proposed cuts and reduces support for key programs serving this population.

Specifically, the governor’s budget:

• Protects the recent grant increase to the State Supplementary Payment (SSP) program.

The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and SSP programs together provide grants to over 1 million older adults with low incomes and people with disabilities to help them pay for housing, food, and other necessities. In recent years, state policymakers have made significant investments to increase SSP grants, however, the total grant levels remain below federal poverty levels. After deep cuts to the program during the Great Recession, grants cannot keep up with rising housing costs, making it difficult for low-income people with disabilities to make ends meet.

The governor’s January proposal included:

• Delaying, by one year, a scheduled raise for workers who care for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
• A funding delay for the Preschool Inclusion Grant program.

The governor proposes to implement this wage increase for around 150,000 workers on July 1, 2025 — one year later than anticipated. This delay would allow the state to avoid $613 million in new state costs in the 2024-25 fiscal year, with these costs instead reflected in the 2025-26 budget. More than 460,000 Californians with intellectual and developmental disabilities — including children receiving early intervention services — are expected to receive supports and services in 2024-25. Delaying pay increases for workers who provide these services could exacerbate staffing shortages across the disability system. This, in turn, would make it more challenging for individuals with disabilities and their families to receive the services that the Lanterman Act requires the state to provide.

The January budget proposal included a delay of $10 million General Fund for this program, which had been delayed to 2024-25 in previous years. This delay essentially postpones its implementation to 2026-27. The Preschool Inclusion Grant program was created in the 2022-23 budget with the goal of supporting preschool programs to include more children with developmental disabilities. This program and proposed reductions are different from the enrollment requirements as part of the California State Preschool Program (see “preschool inclusivity” bullet below).

The May Revision maintains these delays in funding and also:

• Eliminates the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) expansion coverage to undocumented Californians of all ages by cutting $94.7 million ongoing.
• Cuts the planned expansion of preschool inclusivity.
• Cuts $65 million for the Home Safe Program.
• Cuts $50 million for the Housing and Disability Advocacy Program.
• Cuts $44.8 million for Adult Protective Services (APS).
• Does not include funding to reform the Medi-Cal Share of Cost program.

IHSS is a key health care program that helps older adults with low incomes and people with disabilities live safely and with dignity in their own homes. Under the revised spending plan, about 14,000 Californians would lose access to IHSS solely due to their immigration status ( see the Coverage, Affordability & Access section ) .

Currently, at least 5% of California State Preschool Program enrollment must be for students with disabilities. The administration had planned to increase this proportion to at least 10% by 2026-27. However, the 2024-25 proposed budget cuts funding for this increase, reflecting a one-time General Fund savings of $47.9 million in 2025-26 and $97.9 million General Fund ongoing starting in 2026-27 ( see the Early Learning section ) . 

A ppropriated in the 2022 Budget Act, which supports the safety and housing stability of individuals involved in Adult Protective Services ( see the Homelessness section ) .

Appropriated in the 2022 Budget Act, which assists people experiencing or at risk of homelessness connect with disability benefits and housing supports ( see the Homelessness section ) .

This provides abuse intervention and support services to older adults and dependent adults who are unable to meet their own needs. This cut targets a recent expansion effort to address California’s growing aging population, which may limit the program’s reach, particularly for more complex cases.

This would alleviate financial burdens for many older adults and people with disabilities. Under the current Medi-Cal Share of Cost program, many Californians have to live at the maintenance need level in exchange for Medi-Cal services, which forces many to choose between paying for their health care, rent, food, or other basic needs ( see the Coverage, Affordability & Access section ) .

Proposal Eliminates and Delays Vital Services for Immigrant Californians, Maintains Cut to Legal Services

Immigrants are an integral part of California’s communities. They are not just part of the state’s mighty economic engine as taxpayers, entrepreneurs, and members of the workforce — they enrich our cultural identity as the Golden State. They are students, teachers, artists, chefs, religious leaders, colleagues, neighbors, and family members. 

California has the largest share of immigrant residents of any state. Over half of all California workers are immigrants or children of immigrants, and nearly 2 million Californians are undocumented, according to recent estimates .

State leaders have made notable progress in recent years working toward a California for all, where all people have access to economic opportunity and essential services, regardless of immigration status. Extending full-scope Medi-Cal eligibility to undocumented Californians is one significant example of this, and the governor’s May Revision maintains the final and most recent step in this expansion, extending coverage to adults ages 26 to 49. However, the revised budget takes a step backwards by eliminating or delaying other vital services for undocumented Californians that other Californians can access. Specifically, the revised budget:

• Permanently eliminates In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) for all undocumented Californians.
• Delays expanding the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) to undocumented adults age 55 or older, as promised in last year’s budget.

These services help Californians with low incomes who are over the age of 65, blind, and/or disabled live with dignity in their own homes. This harmful and xenophobic cut will cause Californians to lose access to IHSS solely due to their immigration status, potentially pushing them deeper into poverty ( see Health Coverage section ).

Instead of beginning in October 2025, these vital food benefits will be delayed until 2027, denying hundreds of thousands of older Californians access to assistance at a time when 45% of undocumented Californians with low incomes are affected by food insecurity ( see Economic Security section ).

The revised budget also maintains the governor’s January budget proposal to cut immigration legal services, which are a lifeline for immigrant families. Specifically, the May Revision:

• Continues to permanently cut funding for the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Services program , eliminating $10 million General Fund in 2023-24 and each year thereafter, zeroing out all resources for this program. 
• Continues to permanently cut funding for the California State University Legal Services program by $5.2 million General Fund in 2023-24 and each year thereafter.

Cutting support for immigrant legal services is harmful. These services are crucial for helping immigrants stabilize their lives and remain in their communities. Immigration legal services can help put immigrants on a pathway to stability , particularly for those without status. Without access to legal services, immigrants can face greater risks of deportation and family separation, which can lead to financial hardship for families and adverse health outcomes . Given that newly arriving immigrants have the potential to grow the economy and contribute to state and local coffers, supporting them is a strategic investment in our collective future. 

The governor’s May Revision also reduces $29 million for the Rapid Response program in 2024-25, which helps sustain humanitarian support to individuals and families seeking safety at the California-Mexico border in partnership with local providers. This reversion in funds comes out of the $79.4 million General Fund reappropriated for the Rapid Response program from the 2021-22 and 2022-23 budget acts to 2023-24 as part of the early action budget deal approved by policymakers in April. The revised budget proposes no additional state funding for this program in 2024-25 despite the glaring need for continued investment . 

Eliminating and delaying vital services to Californians simply due to their immigration status would have a significant negative impact on immigrant communities and our collective prosperity and is a short-sighted approach to closing the state’s budget shortfall.

Governor Does Not Provide Needed Support to Domestic Violence Survivors

Every Californian deserves to live in a world where they feel safe. However, millions of Californians experience domestic and sexual violence every year — women, transgender, and non-binary Californians, and some women of color are most likely to experience this type of violence. 

Domestic and sexual violence prevention programs are proven ways to stop the violence from occurring in the first place by taking a proactive approach and seeking to shift culture on racial and gender inequities. Since 2018, state policymakers have provided small, one-time grants for prevention programs, administered by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. Besides funding for prevention services, the state also receives federal funding through the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) to help provide essential services to survivors of crime, including survivors of domestic violence. These funds help provide survivors with critical services like emergency shelter, counseling, and financial assistance. 

However, cuts to VOCA at the federal level are resulting in roughly a 45% cut to state grants for organizations that support survivors of crime, decimating the funding of many of these organizations who rely entirely on VOCA funding to provide these critical services. Additionally, the last round of prevention grants will run out at the end of 2024 . Prevention efforts take time, and organizations doing this critical work cannot commit to long term programming without permanent, ongoing funding.

In the May Revision, the governor:

• Does not provide funding to fill the gap in crime victim services funding.
• Does not provide continued funding for domestic violence prevention.
• Eliminates all funding for the cash assistance program for survivors.

In 2021-2022, the state stepped in and provided $100 million in one-time funding to backfill federal VOCA funding gaps. However, since 2019, funding has fallen far short of levels needed to maintain the services local organizations provide to more than 816,000 victims of crime. At the current funding levels, programs will have experienced a 67% cut in funding since 2019. While organizations are being forced to pause critical services to survivors of crime, the state continues to spend billions of dollars on prisons. The state could safely close up to five state prisons, which would result in savings of around $1 billion per year – some of which could be used to help support crime survivors ( see State Corrections section ).

While the 2023-24 budget extended state funding for domestic and sexual violence prevention grants, the governor does not propose any additional funding for new grants in the 2024-25 fiscal year, leaving many organizations uncertain as to how they will continue providing crucial services without funding.

In 2022-23, the state appropriated $50 million to establish the Flexible Assistance for Survivors (FAS) grant program. These dollars were meant to provide grants to community-based organizations to provide flexible assistance such as relocation, care costs, or other basic needs to survivors of crime. In January, the governor proposed delaying the $47.5 million program until 2025-26. However, the May Revision removes all state funding for the program, eliminating another support for survivors of crime.

While the governor has failed to include funding to support survivors of domestic and sexual violence among other crimes, a bipartisan group of Assemblymembers have issued an emergency budget request to address the VOCA funding shortfalls, recognizing the importance of protecting the state’s most vulnerable individuals. 

GUIDE TO THE STATE BUDGET PROCESS

See our report  Guide to the California State Budget Process  to learn more about the state budget and budget process.

Transitional Kindergarten Expansion Continues While Facilities are Cut

The California Department of Education (CDE) hosts two early learning and care programs: Transitional Kindergarten (TK) and the California State Preschool Program (CSPP). CSPP provides preschool to children ages 3 and 4 for families with low to moderate incomes. TK serves 4-year-olds, and eligibility is based on age alone in public schools and is not dependent on family income. Given the overlap with the child care and development programs administered through the California Department of Social Services, CSPP is included in recent family fee and rate reform wins (see Child Care section). However, as Universal TK continues to roll out and CDSS child care and development programs face cuts and delays, the administration has the opportunity to ensure that all early learning and care programs have the resources they need to prioritize family needs and early educator well-being. 

• Continues to fund the implementation of Universal TK expansion.
• Maintains CSPP slots and temporary reimbursement rate increases.
• Cuts the planned $550 million investment in preschool, TK, and full-day kindergarten facilities.

The initial year one expansion took effect during fiscal year 2022-23 and covered children whose fifth birthdays fell between September 2 and February 2 (the previous cut-off was December 2). The year two 2023-24 expansion provided eligibility to children who turn 5 between September 2 and April 2. The year three 2024-25 expansion will extend eligibility to children who turn 5 from April 2 to June 2. The revised budget includes $550 million from the General Fund for this year three expansion. As Universal TK continues to roll out, TK programmatic delays from 2023-24 are still relevant. Specifically, the following are delayed until 2025-26: 1) the reduction in TK classroom ratios to 1:10 and 2) the deadline for TK teachers to earn 24 units (or equivalent), a child development permit, or an early childhood education specialist credential.

The revised budget includes $1.4 billion in 2024-25 to maintain projected CSPP enrollment. As shared in the Child Care section , the 2023-24 enacted budget included one-time funding for temporary reimbursement rate increases and a commitment to developing an alternative methodology for provider rates. While this increase was negotiated by Child Care Providers United (CCPU) – representing home-based providers – the per-child temporary rate increase also applies to CSPP providers. Thus, the one-time funding promised for CSPP provider temporary rate increases is proposed to be maintained for 2024-25. Specifically, the revised budget includes $53.7 million from the General Fund to support reimbursement rate increases. Moreover, if the state does not determine the new rate structure by July 1, 2025, CSPP providers will also have their rates reverted to the 2018 standard reimbursement rate.

Facilities investments are intended to help build new school facilities or retrofit existing buildings in order to provide appropriate spaces for preschool, TK, and full-day kindergarten. The 2023-24 enacted budget reflected $550 million in 2024-25 to support this facilities program. This funding was delayed to 2025-26 in the January budget proposal. However, due to the projected budget shortfall, the dollars that were delayed to 2025-26 are now cut. The administration suggests that preschool, TK, and full-day kindergarten facilities could be added to an education bond proposal.

K-14 Education’s Minimum Funding Level Drops Due to Lower Revenue Estimates

Approved by voters in 1988, Proposition 98 constitutionally guarantees a minimum level of annual funding for K-12 schools, community colleges, and the state preschool program. The governor’s May Revision assumes a 2024-25 Prop. 98 funding level of $109.1 billion for K-14 education. Because the Prop. 98 guarantee tends to reflect changes in state General Fund revenues and estimates of General Fund revenue in the May Revision are lower than estimates in the January budget proposal, the governor’s revised spending plan assumes a decrease in the Prop. 98 guarantee in 2023-24 and 2022-23. Specifically, the May Revision assumes a 2023-24 Prop. 98 funding level of $102.6 billion, $3 billion lower than the $105.6 billion funding level assumed in the governor’s January budget proposal. The 2022-23 Prop. 98 funding level of $97.5 billion is roughly $800 million below the $98.3 billion funding level assumed in January, but it is $9.8 billion below the level assumed in the 2023-24 budget agreement – the largest decline in an estimated Prop. 98 guarantee for a prior-year since Prop. 98 was adopted. 

To address this unprecedented drop in the 2022-23 Prop. 98 guarantee, the governor’s May Revision proposes using the same complex accounting maneuver as the one he proposed in January: the revised budget plan attributes $8.8 billion in reduced Prop. 98 spending to the 2022-23 fiscal year, which would help reduce state General Fund spending to the lower revised Prop. 98 minimum funding level. However, the revised spending plan would not take away the $8.8 billion from K-12 schools and community colleges — dollars they received for 2022-23 that have largely been spent. Instead, the governor proposes to shift the $8.8 billion in K-14 education costs — on paper — from 2022-23 to later fiscal years and pay for these delayed expenses using non-Prop. 98 funds. 

The May Revision also reflects withdrawals of $5.8 billion in 2023-24 and $2.6 billion in 2024-25 from the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA) – the state budget reserve for K-12 schools and community colleges ( see Reserves section ). Because the revised 2023-24 PSSSA balance of $2.6 billion is not projected to exceed 3% of the total K-12 share of the Prop. 98 minimum funding level in 2023-24, current law would allow K-12 school districts to maintain more than 10% of their budgets in local reserves in 2024-25.

Budget Proposal Relies on Reserves to Support K-12 School Funding Formula

The largest share of Prop. 98 funding goes to California’s school districts, charter schools, and county offices of education (COEs), which provide instruction to 5.9 million students in grades kindergarten through 12. The governor’s May Revision maintains the proposal made in his January budget to withdraw funds from the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA) – the state budget reserve for K-12 schools and community colleges – to support the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), the state’s main K-12 education funding formula. Specifically, the governor’s revised spending plan:

• Allocates $7.5 billion from the PSSSA to support ongoing LCFF costs.
• Increases one-time funding for green school buses by roughly $395 million, for a total of approximately $895 million.
• Reduces K-12 school facilities funding by $375 million.
• Provides funding for a 1.07% COLA for non-LCFF programs and the LCFF Equity Multiplier.
• Increases funding for universal school meals by $63.3 million.
• Maintains $25 million in ongoing funding for literacy screening training.

The LCFF provides school districts, charter schools, and COEs a base grant per student, adjusted to reflect the number of students at various grade levels, as well as additional grants for the costs of educating English learners, students from low-income families, and foster youth. The May Revision includes a 1.07% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for the LCFF. To pay for the additional ongoing costs, the proposal would withdraw $5.3 billion from the PSSSA to fund the LCFF in 2023-24 and $2.2 billion to fund the LCFF in 2024-25.

The May Revision sustains a commitment made in the 2023-24 budget agreement to support the greening of school bus fleets through programs operated by the California Air Resources Board and the California Energy Commission in 2024-25. The governor’s proposal would increase 2024-25 funding for green school buses above the $500 million included in his January budget, but would reduce funding committed to the program to $105 million in 2025-26.

The 2022-23 budget agreement included an intention to allocate $875 million in one-time, non-Prop. 98 General Fund spending for the School Facility Program (SFP) to support K-12 facilities construction in 2024-25. The Legislature’s “early action” package approved the governor’s January budget proposal to reduce the 2024-25 SFP allocation by $500 million. The May Revision proposes to eliminate the remaining $375 million in 2024-25 SFP funding.

The governor’s January budget proposal included $65 million to fund a 0.76% COLA for the LCFF Equity Multiplier , established as part of the 2023-24 budget agreement, and for several categorical programs that remain outside of the LCFF, including special education, child nutrition, and American Indian Education Centers. The May Revision would increase ongoing funding to support these COLAs in 2024-25.

California established a Universal Meals Program in the 2022-23 school year that provides two free meals per day to any public K-12 student regardless of income eligibility. The governor’s January budget proposed $122.2 million to fully fund the program in 2024-25, and the May Revision proposes to increase this funding to pay for growth in the projected number of meals served and a COLA ( see Food Assistance section ) .

The 2023-24 budget agreement included a requirement for school districts to begin screening students in kindergarten through 2nd grade for risk of reading difficulties by the 2025-26 school year. The May Revision sustains the governor’s January budget proposal to provide funding to administer these literacy screenings.

Revised Budget Increases Reserve Withdrawals for Community Colleges Funding

A portion of Proposition 98 funding provides support for California’s Community Colleges (CCCs), the largest postsecondary education system in the country, which serves high percentages of students of color and students with low incomes. CCCs prepare more than 1.8 million students to transfer to four-year institutions or to obtain training and employment skills. 

The 2024-25 revised spending plan increases withdrawal amounts from the Prop. 98 reserve for CCC apportionments and provides additional resources to fund an increase in the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA). 

Specifically, the governor’s revised budget includes:

• Reserve withdrawals totaling $914.1 million from state budget reserves for CCC apportionments.
• A 1.07% COLA for apportionments and other programs.

The governor proposes a withdrawal of $381.6 million from the Prop. 98 reserve (also known as the Public School System Stabilization Account or PSSSA) ( see Reserves section ) in 2023-24 and $532.6 million in 2024-25 for the Student Centered Funding Formula (SCFF).

This includes $100.2 million ongoing Prop. 98 dollars for the SCFF. The revised spending plan also provides ongoing Prop. 98 resources to provide the same percentage COLA to other CCC categorical programs and the Adult Education Program.

Revised Proposal Maintains Deferrals for the CSU and UC Systems

California supports two public four-year higher education institutions: the California State University (CSU) and the University of California (UC). The CSU provides undergraduate and graduate education to nearly 460,000 students at 23 campuses, and the UC provides undergraduate, graduate, and professional education to more than 290,000 students across 10 campuses. 

The governor’s revised budget includes additional cuts to higher education and maintains funding deferrals for both of the state’s public university systems. 

The January proposal included:

• A deferral of $240 million General Fund dollars from 2024-25 to 2025-26 for the CSU.
• Deferrals totaling $259 million General Fund dollars from 2024-25 to 2025-26 for the UC.
• A reduction of $494 million in General Fund dollars for the California Student Housing Revolving Loan Fund Program.

These dollars were meant to fulfill multi-year funding increases as part of the CSU compact. Under this proposal, the governor intends to restore this funding commitment in 2025-26, along with the scheduled base increase for the fourth year of the agreements. Additionally, the administration would also provide a one-time payment of $240 million in 2025-26 as part of the deferral.

This includes a deferral of $228 million for base increase as part of the multi-year compact with the UC and $31 million to support the UC in increasing the number of resident undergraduate students. In 2025-26, the governor intends to restore the $228 million on top of the increase scheduled for the fourth year of this compact and provide a total of$62 million for resident undergraduate enrollment, reflecting the deferred amount and that year’s increase for this purpose. The administration would also provide one-time payments of $228 million and $31 million to compensate for the deferrals in 2024-25 of the same amount.

The proposal pulls back $194 million in 2023-24 and $300 million in 2024-25. This program provides interest-free loans to campuses for new student housing projects.

The May Revision maintains these proposals and also include the following cuts in higher education:

• An ongoing reduction of nearly $14 million General Fund for the Proposition 56 General Fund backfill that supports Graduate Medical Education programs at the UC. 
• An ongoing cut of $13 million General Fund for the UC Labor Centers. This funding provides support for economic research and labor education across various UC campuses. 
• A reduction of $485 million General Fund of unspent one-time dollars for the Learning-Aligned Employment Program. The program provides resources for students at public colleges and universities to earn money while learning in a field related to their educational and career interests ( see Workforce section ).
• A $60 million General Fund cut for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program. This program provides awards to students in professional preparation programs and who are working toward a teaching credential. 

May Revision Abandons Commitments to Expand Student Financial Aid

The budget shortfall and proposed solutions significantly impacts access to financial aid opportunities for California students. The May Revision does not include funding for the anticipated reform to the Cal Grant program and reduces funding for the Middle Class Scholarship (MCS). 

Specifically, the revised spending plan:

• Does not trigger the Cal Grant Reform Act.
• Walks back expansion of the MCS.

Given the multi-year shortfall, the revised spending plan does not include funding for the Cal Grant Reform Act, which was included in the 2022-23 budget, and the governor does not propose any budgetary actions to phase in the program. Trailer bill language as part of the 2022-23 budget stated that the reform would become operative if General Fund dollars “over multi-year forecasts” are available beginning in 2024-25. The Cal Grant is California’s financial aid program for low-income students pursuing postsecondary education in the state. These grants support students by providing financial assistance so they can afford the costs of college attendance, including meeting their basic needs such as housing, food, transportation, and child care. The Cal Grant Reform Act would reach thousands of new students who were previously not eligible and would also allow more students to qualify for CalFresh food assistance, freeing up resources for institutions to support students with other non-tuition costs.

The May Revision proposes an ongoing cut to the MCS of $510 million . The revised spending plan also includes an additional spending reduction of more than $20 million, reflecting revised program estimates. These two actions reduce total spending for the program down to $100 million ongoing, reflecting an 88% drop from the 2023-24 total funding level. The May Revision also maintains the January proposal to abandon a planned one-time investment of $289 million that was included as part of the 2023-24 budget. The state created the MCS program in 2013-14 to provide partial tuition coverage to CSU and UC students who were not eligible for Cal Grants. The program was revamped in 2022-23 by increasing funding and implementing new rules. Due to these changes, a broader group of students received the awards. Eligible students include those who qualify based on income (maximum household income is $217,000), low-income students who qualify through other requirements, and community college students in bachelor’s degree programs.

Overall, these budget choices have consequences for college affordability, degree attainment, and overall student well-being. Students pursuing postsecondary education confront significant hardship to afford basic necessities , and they are often forced to make difficult decisions that impact their college experience and degree completion .

May Revision Calls for Deactivating Prison Housing Units, but Not Prison Closures

More than 93,000 adults who have been convicted of a felony offense are serving their sentences at the state level , down from a peak of 173,600 in 2007. This sizable drop in incarceration is largely due to justice system reforms adopted since the late 2000s, including Proposition 47 , which California voters passed with nearly 60% support in 2014 . Despite this substantial progress, American Indian, Black, and Latinx Californians are disproportionately represented in state prisons — a racial disparity that reflects racist practices in the justice system as well as structural disadvantages faced by communities of color.

Among all incarcerated adults, most — about 90,000 — are housed in state prisons designed to hold roughly 75,500 people. This overcrowding equals 119% of the prison system’s “design capacity,” which is below the prison population cap — 137.5% of design capacity — established by a 2009 federal court order. California also houses around 3,000 people in facilities that are not subject to the cap, including fire camps, in-state “contract beds,” and community-based facilities that provide rehabilitative services.

• Calls for deactivating 46 housing units across 13 state prisons, for ongoing annual state savings of around $80 million.
• Fails to advance a plan to close state prisons.
• Proposes deep cuts to the Adult Reentry Grant (ARG) program.

The housing units proposed for deactivation contain roughly 4,600 beds. However, the state prison system currently operates with about 15,000 empty beds . Moreover, closing housing blocks rather than entire prisons saves the state less money because ongoing operational and staffing costs are higher when prisons remain open. For example, while the governor’s proposal would reduce state costs by around $80 million per year, the state would save around $200 million per year for every prison it closes. Given California’s challenging fiscal outlook, state leaders should be exploring ways to significantly reduce spending on prisons in order to ensure the wise use of state tax dollars and maximize state savings.

In recent years, California has ended the use of private prisons and shut down three state prisons. State leaders can — and should — go further. In fact, due to the large number of empty prison beds, the state could safely close up to five additional prisons, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office . Closing five more state prisons would save around $1 billion per year — dollars that could be redirected to help incarcerated individuals successfully transition back to their communities as well as support crime survivors, reduce poverty, increase housing stability, and address substance use and mental health issues. Unfortunately, the May Revision fails to advance a plan to close more prisons, with the governor instead focusing on deactivating selected prison housing units for far less state savings.

Community-based organizations use ARG funds to help formerly incarcerated people successfully transition back to their communities. In January, the governor proposed to cut $7.8 million in unspent ARG funds from 2022-23 as well as to delay $57 million in ARG funds budgeted for 2024-25 to the next three fiscal years (2025-26 to 2027-28 — providing $19 million per year). The May Revision maintains the $7.8 million cut and also proposes two significant reductions: 1) eliminate (rather than delay) the $57 million budgeted for 2024-25 and 2) cut $54.1 million in ARG funds budgeted for 2023-24. The governor’s proposal represents a major step back from recent efforts to ensure that people released from prison are prepared to successfully reenter their communities.

Revised Budget Continues to Provide Over $100 Million to Address Retail Theft

Retail theft  is defined in several ways  in California law:

• Shoplifting
• Commercial burglary
• Organized retail theft

Shoplifting occurs when the value of stolen goods is $950 or less (petty theft) — a limit set by Proposition 47 of 2014 . Shoplifting is generally a misdemeanor, but may be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony if the defendant was previously convicted of certain severe crimes or is required to register as a sex offender.

Commercial burglary covers higher-value retail theft (grand theft) and can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony.

Organized retail theft , a specific type of theft created by the Legislature in 2018 , is punishable as a misdemeanor or a felony.

Robbery , a felony, occurs when force or a threat of force is involved. “Smash and grab” incidents are prominent examples of robberies affecting retail businesses.

Retail theft rose following the isolation and social breakdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In California, commercial burglary and robbery rates continued to exceed their pre-pandemic (2019) levels as of 2022, the most recent year for which statewide data are available. In contrast, California’s statewide shoplifting rate remains below the 2019 level despite a recent increase.

In January, Governor Newsom proposed to provide $119 million in 2024-25 to address organized retail theft and other crimes. This was the same amount of General Fund support provided in the current fiscal year (2023-24) despite the large budget shortfall the state is facing.

The May Revision modestly reduces the total funding level from $119 million to $115.4 million. This reflects a $3.6 million cut to the Vertical Prosecution Grant Program, which would see its funding reduced from $10 million to $6.4 million in 2024-25. The governor does not propose cuts in 2024-25 to other components of his organized retail theft package, which includes $85 million for local law enforcement agencies and $24 million for state-level task forces and prosecution teams.

Revised Budget Estimates Proposition 47 Savings of $95 Million for Local Investments

Overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2014, Prop. 47 reduced penalties for six nonviolent drug and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. Consequently, state prison generally is no longer a sentencing option for these crimes. Instead, individuals convicted of a Prop. 47 offense serve their sentence in county jail and/or receive probation.

By decreasing state-level incarceration, Prop. 47 reduced the cost of the prison system relative to the expected cost if Prop. 47 had not been approved by voters. The Department of Finance is required to annually calculate these state savings, which are deposited into the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund and used as follows:

• 65% for behavioral health services — which includes mental health services and substance use treatment — as well as diversion programs for individuals who have been arrested, charged, or convicted of crimes. These funds are distributed as competitive grants administered by the Board of State and Community Corrections.
• 25% for K-12 school programs to support vulnerable youth. These funds are distributed as competitive grants administered by the California Department of Education.
• 10% to trauma recovery services for crime victims. These funds are distributed as competitive grants administered by the California Victim Compensation Board.

As of the 2023 Budget Act, the state has allocated roughly $720 million in savings attributable to Prop. 47 — funds that have been invested in local programs that support healing and keep communities safe. For example, a recent evaluation shows that people who received Prop. 47-funded behavioral health services and/or participated in diversion programs were much less likely to be convicted of a new crime. Specifically, individuals enrolled in these programs had a recidivism rate of just 15.3% — two to three times lower than is typical for people who have served prison sentences (recidivism rates range from 35% to 45% for these individuals).

The May Revision estimates that Prop. 47 has generated an additional $94.8 million in state savings due to reduced state-level incarceration. These dollars will be allocated through the 2024 Budget Act, increasing Prop. 47’s total investment in California’s communities to more than $800 million since these savings were first allocated through the 2016 Budget Act.

Governor Proposes Additional Cuts to Several Workforce Programs

The revised budget proposes to cut spending on several workforce development programs to help address the multi-year budget problem. ( See Health Workforce section. ) Specific cuts include:

• $50 million General Fund in 2024-25 and 2025-26 to California Jobs First (formerly called the Community Economic Resilience Fund).
• $20 million General Fund in 2024-25 to the California Youth Leadership Corp
• $20 million General Fund in 2025-26 to the Apprenticeship Innovation Fund at the Department of Industrial Relations.
• $10 million General Fund ongoing for the Women in Construction Unit at the Department of Industrial Relations.
• $10 million General Fund in 2025-26 for the Department of Industrial Relations’ California Youth Apprenticeship Program.

This program is an inter-agency partnership that supports strategies to diversify local economies and develop sustainable industries that create high-quality, broadly accessible jobs.

This is an initiative of the Workforce Development Agency, certain community colleges, and non-profit organizations that prepares historically marginalized youth to become community organizers and change agents in their local communities.

This is in addition to the $40 million General Fund delay in 2024-25 that was included in the governor’s January budget.

This aims to increase opportunities in the construction industry for women, non-binary, and underserved communities.

This provides apprenticeships for youth ages 16 to 24. This cut is in addition to the $25 million General Fund spending delay in 2024-25 that was included in the governor’s January budget.

In addition, the revised budget cuts $485 million General Fund in unspent one-time funds for the Learning-Aligned Employment Program in 2022-23. This program places eligible students at public colleges and universities in employment opportunities related to their area of study or career objectives. ( See higher education sections .)

Revised Budget Proposes Further Cuts to Prior Environment Commitments

Californians across the state have increasingly seen the effects of climate change through devastating fires, droughts, and floods, but communities of color and low-income communities are often hit hardest by these catastrophes due to historical and ongoing displacement and underinvestment. Additionally, these communities are more likely to be exposed to environmental pollutants for the same reasons. 

Significant investments in climate resilience were made through recent years’ budgets. Most of the commitments were one-time investments intended to be made across several years, so there are significant unspent funds remaining. In January, the governor proposed budget solutions that included $2.9 billion in reductions and $1.9 billion in delays of climate investments committed in previous budget agreements. Several of these proposals were included, or partially included in the early action agreement between the governor and the Legislature.

The May Revision proposes around $1 billion in additional reductions to climate and environment programs for 2022-23 as well as further reductions to planned spending beyond the current budget window. Reductions are proposed in areas including but not limited to clean energy and transportation, water and drought resilience, and wildfire resilience.

Significant new reductions that may disproportionately impact low-income and under-resourced communities include:

• $399 million for the Active Transportation Program across 2025-26 and 2026-27 ($300 million in 2025-26 and $99 million in 2026-27).
• $268.5 million for the Cleanup in Vulnerable Communities Initiative ($136 million in 2023-24, $85 million in 2025-26, and $47.5 million in 2026-27).
• $140 million for the Equitable Building Decarbonization program across 2024-25 and 2025-26 ($53 million in 2024-25 and $87 million in 2025-26).

This program supports walking and biking options with the goals of improving safety and mobility and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Transportation Commission notes that 85% of funds committed have gone to projects benefiting disadvantaged communities.

The initiative was created in 2021 and committed $500 million across four years to clean up hazardous waste sites in communities subject to environmental hazards.

This program provides funds for 1) energy retrofits for low and moderate income households and 2) incentives for the adoption of energy efficient technologies, at least half of which must benefit under-resourced communities. This appears to be in addition to the $286 million proposed reduction across several years included in the January proposal.

You may also be interested in the following resources:

Closing prisons can help avoid cuts, fund vital safety net and health programs, governor newsom proposes harmful cuts, policymakers have alternatives, stay in the know..

Join our email list!

Thanks for signing up!

There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us

Please check your email to confirm your signup.