Skip to content

Introduction

On March 12, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act to provide much needed assistance to tens of millions of people, including millions of Californians. The $1.9 trillion federal aid package will bring approximately $150 billion in federal aid to California to help reduce economic hardship for low- and middle-income households, support workers, help schools address learning needs, boost early care and learning, combat housing instability and homelessness, and bolster the economy. 

This latest round of federal fiscal relief will help reduce hardship as a result of the pandemic, particularly for Californians with low incomes and people of color, and begins to set the stage for a more equitable economic recovery. This report outlines key provisions of the plan and what it means for Californians. 

Contents

Fiscal Aid to State and Local Governments

Recovery Rebates & Tax Credits

Supports for Workers

Economic Security

Health

Housing and Homelessness

Education


Fiscal Aid to State and Local Governments

American Rescue Plan Provides Direct Aid to State and Local Governments

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

Federal lawmakers authorized $350 billion in flexible fiscal aid to state and local governments.

How can the funding be used?

The federal fiscal aid can be used for any of the following purposes.

  • Covering COVID-19-related public health and economic costs.
  • Offsetting state and local government revenue losses compared to the prior fiscal year.
  • Providing premium pay to essential workers of up to $13/hour on top of their current wages, up to a maximum of $25,000 per worker.
  • Expanding broadband, water, and sewer infrastructure.

Any government adopting tax cuts that result in a net loss of revenue will lose an equivalent amount in federal aid. While this restriction is intended to ensure that state and local governments are spending the fiscal aid on COVID-19 relief and related purposes, it may also apply to tax credits that provide cash assistance to low-income households and small businesses harmed by the pandemic. The US Treasury is expected to provide clarification on the use of those credits by mid-May.

States and local governments are also prohibited from using the fiscal aid to make deposits into state and local pension funds.

How soon will the funding arrive and what is the timeline for using it?

The US Treasury will distribute funding to states by mid-May. Counties and cities will receive 50% of their allocations by mid-May and the other 50% a year later. There is no deadline for spending the funds.

What does this mean for California? 

The significant and flexible fiscal aid provided by the federal government means that California’s state and local governments will have additional funding to address the public health and economic effects of the pandemic over the next couple of years and provides fiscal stability, particularly to local governments confronting declining revenues as a result of business closures and reduced retail and tourism activity. The fiscal aid also helps California’s state and local governments avoid having to cut vital public support for Californians, particularly low-income households and people of color who have been disproportionately harmed by the pandemic. 

Recovery Rebates

Third Rebate Provides Cash to Many Households, but Some Californians Remain Excluded

How do the rebates work and who will benefit?

The American Rescue Plan provides a third recovery rebate to most US households equal to $1,400 per family member – the largest recovery rebate to date. To qualify for the full rebate, married-joint tax filers must have incomes of $150,000 or less, heads of household must have incomes of $112,500 or less, and all other filers must have incomes of $75,000 or less. Filers with incomes slightly above these limits qualify for a portion of the rebate.

When will Californians benefit from the rebates?

Most people who are eligible for the third recovery rebate will receive the payment automatically from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which began sending payments soon after the ARP was signed into law.

How much money could Californians receive?

Californians could receive $35 billion to $43 billion in total from these rebates, according to estimates by the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. These estimates imply that between 25 million and 31 million Californians could receive these payments.

What does this mean for Californians?

Most Californians will receive the third federal rebate, and those with low incomes will have an easier time paying for basic expenses. Undocumented Californians, however, remain excluded from these payments. Their children, who were also excluded from the first and second rebates, will be eligible to get the third rebate if they have Social Security Numbers, but they will not be provided the first or second rebates retroactively. This means that undocumented and mixed status families have received thousands of dollars less in federal aid than other families during the pandemic. California’s Golden State Stimulus replaced a portion of the federal rebates these families were denied, and state leaders could replace even more of those payments using the $26 billion in American Rescue Plan dollars designated for household economic relief.

The ARP Makes Important, but Temporary, Improvements to the Federal EITC

How does the federal EITC change work and who will benefit?

The ARP makes important improvements to the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) for tax year 2021 (for which people will begin filing in early 2022). Specifically, the ARP allows more workers who are not raising children in their homes to qualify for the credit by:

  1. Lowering the age limit to qualify from 25 to 19 (except for full-time students, who must be at least 24, and certain former foster youth and homeless youth who can be at least 18);
  2. Eliminating the upper age limit of 64; and
  3. Raising the income limit to qualify for the credit from about $16,000 to at least $21,000.

In addition, the ARP will nearly triple the maximum credit that workers without qualifying children can receive from $543 currently to about $1,500.

These changes to the federal EITC do not affect California’s Earned Income Tax Credit (CalEITC).

When will Californians benefit from these changes?

In 2022 when they file for tax year 2021.

How much money could Californians receive?

About 2.7 million Californians are expected to benefit from these changes and collectively they could receive around $1.5 billion in 2022, according to estimates by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

What does this mean for Californians?

Many Californians with low incomes can expect larger tax refunds next year that will help them to pay for basic expenses. Undocumented Californians, however, will not benefit from these improvements in the federal EITC because they remain excluded from the credit. To help address this exclusion, state leaders could provide a larger CalEITC to undocumented Californians and their families.

Policymakers Temporarily Expand and Increase the Federal Child Tax Credit

How does the Child Tax Credit expansion work and who will benefit?

Federal policymakers made significant, but temporary, changes to the Child Tax Credit (CTC) for tax year 2021. Specifically, the ARP:

  • Makes the credit fully refundable, meaning that a family will be able to receive the full credit even if it exceeds the taxes the family owes. Previously, families could only receive a refund equal to a portion of their earnings above $2,500, up to $1,400 per child. As a result, many families with low incomes were left out of receiving the full credit. And because the earnings threshold is eliminated for tax year 2021, families with no earnings can receive the credit.
  • Makes 17-year-olds eligible for the credit. Previously, families could only receive $500 for 17-year-old dependents.
  • Increases the maximum per-child credit from $2,000 under current law to $3,000 for children age 6 or over and to $3,600 for children under age 6. These additional amounts will begin phasing out starting at $150,000 for married couples, $112,500 for heads of household, and $75,000 for other parents.
  • Makes half of the credit available through advance payments from July through December 2021. These payments will be based on the estimated amount of the credit a family is eligible to receive based on its 2020 tax return, or its 2019 return if it did not file in 2020. The ARP limits the amount that a low-income family would be required to repay if it receives advance payments in excess of the amount it qualifies for in tax year 2021 (for example, if a parent receives advance payments related to a child who lived with them in 2020 but no longer lives with them in 2021).

When will Californians benefit from these changes?

Families may receive advance payments beginning in July 2021 equal to one-half of the amount of the total credit a family is estimated to be eligible to receive for tax year 2021. The remainder will be provided in 2022 when families file for tax year 2021. 

How much aid will Californians receive and how many will benefit?

This temporary expansion will result in an increase in total Child Tax Credit benefits of $13.7 billion for Californians, with nearly half of those benefits going to the lowest-income 40% — those with incomes under $46,900 — according to estimates from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP). These changes will benefit 7.9 million to 9 million California children, according to estimates from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) and ITEP, respectively. More than three-quarters (78%) of the children who will benefit in California are children of color, according to CBPP estimates. The CTC changes could lift nearly one-third (32%) of California children out of poverty, with Black and Latinx children seeing the largest reductions, according to estimates from the Public Policy Institute of California. Undocumented children remain excluded from the federal Child Tax Credit, but undocumnted parents may claim the credit for qualifying children who have Social Security Numbers.

Low- and Moderate-Income Families To See Temporary Improvement of Tax Credit

How does the CDCEC change work and who will benefit?

The Child and Dependent Care Expenses Credit (CDCEC) reimburses families for a portion of their expenses for child care or care for another dependent who is incapable of self-care. For tax year 2021 (for which people will begin filing in early 2022), the ARP makes this credit refundable. This means that many low- and moderate-income families who are currently excluded from the credit because they do not owe income tax will be able to receive it, while other families will receive a larger credit than they otherwise would have without this change.

The ARP also substantially increases the size of the credit families can receive from a maximum of $2,100 to $8,000 for two or more dependents and from a maximum of $1,050 to $4,000 for one dependent. The size of the credit will increase because of two changes. First, the new law increases the limit on the amount of annual care expenses eligible for reimbursement from $3,000 to $8,000 for one dependent and from $6,000 to $16,000 for two or more dependents. Second, the bill increases the share of those expenses that can be reimbursed for families with incomes under $183,000, with larger increases for families with the lowest incomes. For example, families with incomes up to $125,000 can have half of their eligible expenses reimbursed under the new law. Currently, they can only have between 20% and 35% of their eligible expenses reimbursed.

The ARP also limits the CDCEC to families with incomes of $438,000 or less, whereas currently there is no upper income limit to qualify for the credit. In addition, it phases out the amount of eligible care expenses that can be reimbursed for families with incomes between $400,000 and $438,000.

These changes to the federal CDCEC do not automatically affect California’s version of the credit. 

How much money could Californians receive?

At this time the Budget Center is not aware of any estimates of how many Californians could benefit from the changes to this credit or how much money they could receive.

When will Californians benefit from these changes?

In 2022 when they file for tax year 2021.

What does this mean for Californians?

Many families with low or moderate incomes will receive larger credits next year when they file their taxes, making it easier to pay for basic expenses, including child care.

Support for Workers

Unemployment Benefits Extended Until Early September

How do these extensions work and who will benefit?

Federal policymakers extended several provisions under the American Rescue Plan benefiting jobless workers that were slated to expire in March 2021. For example, the new law:

  • Extends through September 6 the Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) program, which provides unemployment benefits to jobless workers who don’t qualify for regular unemployment benefits, such as people who are self-employed;
  • Increases the maximum number of weeks of benefits available through the PUA from 57 weeks to up to 86 weeks;
  • Increases the maximum number of weeks of benefits available through the Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (PEUC) program, which benefits jobless workers who exhaust regular unemployment benefits, from 24 weeks to 53 weeks; and
  • Extends the Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) through September 6, which provides an additional $300-per-week benefit on top of what workers receive through either their state’s regular UI program or the PUA.

An Employment Development Department chart shows the various federal unemployment benefits available to jobless workers during the pandemic and how long those benefits last. 

When will Californians benefit from these changes?

The Employment Development Department has indicated that it will need until the middle of April to implement the unemployment benefit extensions. 

How much money could Californians receive?

The amount of money Californians could receive from federal unemployment benefit extensions is difficult to estimate because it depends on how long it takes workers to find jobs as the economy recovers. The Legislative Analyst’s Office roughly estimates that Californians could potentially receive around $40 billion from these extensions if the number of benefit claims continues a moderate decline through September.

What does this mean for Californians?

California’s unemployment rate is still twice as high as it was before the pandemic began, and women as well as Black and Latinx workers remain more likely to be out of work than men and white workers. The extension of federal unemployment benefits will help the many Californians who remain out of work due to the pandemic pay for basic expenses. Unfortunately, however, these benefit extensions will expire this fall when unemployment will likely still be high, particularly for workers who have been hit hardest by the recession. This means that some Californians are likely to still need additional support meeting basic needs later this year.

First $10,200 in Unemployment Benefits Excluded from Federal Income Tax

How does this exclusion of benefits work and who will benefit?

The ARP excludes the first $10,200 in unemployment benefits received in 2020 from federal income tax for filers with adjusted gross incomes less than $150,000. This will reduce or eliminate many filers’ tax liability. Without this provision, many people who received unemployment benefits during the pandemic would face unexpectedly large tax bills when they filed federal income taxes this year. (Unemployment benefits are not subject to California’s income tax so they will not face surprise tax bills on these benefits when they file state taxes.)

When will Californians benefit from this change?

People who might benefit from this change in law should wait to file federal income taxes until the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) updates tax forms to reflect this change. It is not yet clear whether people who filed their taxes already will have to file amended returns in order to benefit from this change.

How much money could Californians receive?

At this time the Budget Center is not aware of any estimates of how many Californians could benefit from this change or how much money they could receive.

What does this mean for Californians?

Many Californians who lost work last year will owe less in federal income taxes this year and could also get larger tax credits than they otherwise would have. That’s because this change in federal law will reduce some tax filers’ federal adjusted gross income (AGI) in tax year 2020, making them eligible for larger tax credits, including the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and California’s Earned Income Tax Credit (CalEITC). It is not yet clear whether people who already filed their taxes for tax year 2020 will have to file amended returns in order to receive the proper amount of the credits they are now owed. The IRS is currently advising tax filers not to file amended returns until further notice.

Tax Credits Extended for Businesses Voluntarily Offering Paid Time Off to Workers

How does the American Rescue Plan help workers and businesses with paid time off during the pandemic?

The federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act passed in March 2020 temporarily addressed US workers’ lack of paid time off by requiring certain employers to provide both paid sick days and paid leave for COVID-related reasons through December 31, 2020. Businesses received payroll tax credits to cover the cost of the paid time off for their workers. The new American Rescue Plan extends these refundable tax credits to businesses who continue to voluntarily provide paid time off through September 30, 2021. However, businesses are no longer required to provide paid time off under the newly enacted federal law. 

Which organizations and workers can benefit from the new law?

Organizations with less than 500 employees are eligible for the payroll tax credits, which offset the cost of providing paid time off to workers. Eligible organizations include businesses, nonprofits, state and local governments, and self-employed people, as well. To qualify for tax credits, employers must offer leave to all workers, including workers paid low wages, with part-time schedules, and newly-hired workers. Workers employed by an organization voluntarily providing benefits, can take paid time off for a variety of COVID-related reasons under the new law:

  • Unable to work because they are subject to quarantine, have been advised to quarantine, are getting tested for or are waiting for test results for the virus; 
  • Sick with COVID-19 or experiencing symptoms of the virus; 
  • Absent from work to receive the vaccination or recovering from the vaccination; 
  • Workers caring for someone who is sick, is experiencing COVID-19 symptoms, or is in quarantine due to the virus; or
  • Workers caring for a child whose school or child care provider is closed due to the virus.

Workers and employers are able to utilize paid sick time and receive the federal tax credits even if workers have already used paid sick days under the Families First provisions prior to April 1, 2021. 

What are the benefits for paid time off?

Employers will receive payroll tax credits for voluntarily providing paid sick days and paid leave from April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021. Workers will be paid while away from work as follows: 

  • Workers using paid sick days due to their own illness, quarantine, or vaccination will receive payments equal to 100% of their wages up to $511 per day or $5,110 total for ten days. 
  • Workers using paid sick days to care for a sick family member or a child will receive payments equal to two-thirds of their regular pay, up to $200 per day or $2,000 total for ten days.
  • Workers using paid leave to care for themselves or a family member will receive up to 12 weeks of paid time off at two-thirds of their regular pay capped at $200 per day and $12,000 total.

What does this mean for Californians?

Employers are not required to provide paid time off during the public health crisis under the new federal law, which would generally limit workers’ ability to care for themselves or their families during the pandemic. However, Governor Newsom just signed into law a bill that requires employers with 25 or more workers to provide 10 emergency paid sick days to care for themselves or a family member until September 30, 2021. In some cases, California’s state disability insurance program and paid family leave program can help fill some gaps for workers who need additional time off during the pandemic if their employer is not voluntarily providing paid time off. When the state and federal provisions expire, employers in California will be required to provide just three paid sick days to their workers.

Economic Security

Policymakers Provide Significant Boost in One-Time Funding, Create Opportunity to Build Strong Child Care Foundation

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

The American Rescue Plan provides $40 billion to support early care and education, including funding for providers, workers, and their families. This includes:

How can the funding be used?

Leaders in California can use the new federal funding in the following ways:

  • The $1.4 billion in Child Care and Development Block Grant funding boosts support for California’s subsidized child care and development system. State policymakers have flexibility in using the one-time funding, such as providing additional spaces for children in subsidized programs, increasing provider payment rates during the public health emergency, or waiving fees paid by many families receiving subsidized care. While subsidized child care is typically reserved for families with low and moderate incomes, this bill allows states to expand eligibility for subsidized care to essential workers regardless of income. 
  • The $2.3 billion in child care stabilization funds are to be distributed as grants to eligible child care providers —  not just those participating in the state’s subsidized system — including providers who have remained open and those who closed due to the pandemic. Grants can be used for a variety of expenses, such as paying wages, facility expenses, COVID-related supplies and equipment, and mental health support for children and staff. This includes reimbursement for extra costs covered by providers in the last year as a result of the pandemic. Providers receiving grants are to follow public health guidelines, maintain employee wages, and provide relief from child care fees for families struggling to afford care, if possible.
  • The $105 million in Head Start funding will go directly to Head Start providers in California to maintain services during the public health crisis. Funds will be available through September 2022.
  • Ongoing funding received through the Child Care Entitlement to States will increase support for subsidized child care in California and can be used for similar purposes as Child Care and Development Block Grant funding, with some stipulations. In order to receive this funding, states must provide matching funds up to a certain amount, but this requirement is waived for the 2021 and 2022 federal fiscal years. 

Generally, state policymakers may not use the funding for subsidized child care or stabilization funds to replace existing dollars for child care in California.The funds can only be used to supplement current spending.

What are the timelines for using federal child care relief funds?

California leaders have various timelines for utilizing the one-time federal child care relief funds that are to be administered by the state. Specifically, state leaders must:

  • Determine how the $1.4 billion in Child Care Development Block Grant funds will be spent by September 2023 and expend these funds by September 2024.
  • Provide grants to providers using the $2.3 billion in child care stabilization funds. After 10% is withheld for administrative expenses, the state must commit at least 50% of these funds within nine months of enactment or notify the federal government of the inability to do so. This means that the state must commit roughly $1 billion in grants to child care providers across the state via a new grant program by December 11, 2021. 

What does this mean for California? 

Child care is a critical component of the state and nation’s economic infrastructure, but chronic underinvestment by both the state and federal government has resulted in a fragile system that has not been able to weather the shocks of the COVID-19 health and economic crisis. The American Rescue Plan is the third round of federal child care relief funds provided to states since the beginning of the pandemic. California first received $350 million as part of the CARES Act in March 2020, but the distribution of the first round of federal child care relief funds was subject to administrative delays The state also received $964 million as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 which was enacted in December 2020. While state policymakers have determined how $402 million of the $964 million allocated through the Appropriations Act will be spent, $562 million will likely be included in the 2021-22 budget agreement which begins on July 1. It is critical that state leaders fast track a plan to quickly and equitably distribute funding from both the second and third round of funding while minimizing delays in providing relief for families and providers.

These one-time federal relief dollars provide a unique opportunity to create a firmer foundation for the child care sector in California, while also providing fiscal relief for both parents and providers during the COVID-19 crisis. However, it will take significant ongoing investments from both the state and federal government to adequately fund the child care sector beyond the current health emergency and recession. Ongoing funding is necessary to ensure that children have a safe place to learn and grow, working parents have access to affordable child care, and providers are paid fair and just rates.

Federal Policymakers Extend Food Assistance but Still Exclude Some Californians

How does the American Rescue Plan extend CalFresh benefits?

In December, federal policymakers provided a 15% increase in monthly food assistance benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as CalFresh in California. The ARP maintains this increase, which was set to expire in June, and extends it through September 30, 2021. The relief package allocates $355 million to California to support this extension, providing an average monthly benefits increase of $28 for Californians who participate in CalFresh. 

How else does the ARP support nutrition?

The new federal relief package also extends the Pandemic EBT (P-EBT) program through the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency. P-EBT provides grocery benefits to replace meals that children would otherwise receive at school or at child care. 

Federal legislators also allocated funds to the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). These funds will support improved outreach to participants and increased access to fruits and vegetables. 

How will this assistance benefit Californians and who is left out? 

The strengthened food assistance in the new relief package will address food insecurity in California, which has worsened during the COVID-19 recession. About 1.9 million households with children (15.9%) reported sometimes or often not having enough food to eat during a four-week period in late June and July. This includes more than 1 in 5 of Latinx households and Black households with children reporting sometimes or often not having enough to eat (21.9% and 20.2%, respectively). The federal relief package will help many of these Californians as they struggle with food hardship. However, with the exception of asylees, refugees, and some other “qualified” immigrants, most immigrants remain excluded from receiving CalFresh.

California Will Receive Additional Funds Under CalWORKs to Help Families with Children

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

The American Rescue Plan created a $1 billion Pandemic Emergency Assistance Fund to allow states, territories, and tribes to provide families with short-term emergency benefits. The fund will be administered through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program, known as CalWORKs in California.

  • 92.5% of the funds (after subtracting $2 million reserved for federal administration) will be distributed to states according to a formula which is equally weighted based on the state’s share of the child population and its prior share of spending on specific TANF categories. California will receive $203.8 million.
  • 7.5% of funds will be distributed to US territories and tribes.

How can the funding be used?

States, territories, and tribes can use the funds only to provide families with non-recurrent, short term cash or in-kind benefits (no more than four months) to address specific crises or episodes of need — not to support ongoing needs. Examples are short-term cash assistance, emergency housing vouchers, utility payments, food aid, and burial assistance. The funds can not be used for tax credits, child care, transportation, or education and training. 

How soon will the funding arrive and what is the timeline for using it?

States must request funding within 45 days of the enactment of the American Rescue Plan, or April 25, 2021. Any funds that remain unspent by the end of September 2022 will be reallocated to other states, territories, and tribes, which will then have to use the funds within one year of receipt.

What does this mean for California? 

Many California families with children, particularly Black and Latinx families, have faced significant hardship during the pandemic, including having difficulty covering basic expenses and facing food insecurity. The Pandemic Emergency Assistance funds will give the state the ability to address urgent needs of California families with children who have low incomes. The state has the flexibility to use the funds in various ways, including providing short-term supplemental assistance to families already receiving CalWORKs cash assistance, assisting other families demonstrating financial hardship — such as those receiving CalFresh nutrition benefits — and providing emergency cash or in-kind aid to families ineligible for other relief. 

Health

The American Rescue Plan Substantially Cuts Consumers’ Costs for Private Health Insurance

What new federal assistance is available to people who buy private health insurance?

The ARP makes private health insurance more affordable for consumers. This is expected to encourage people to keep their coverage or — for those who are uninsured — to newly enroll in coverage. Specifically, the law:

  • Expands federal subsidies for people who buy coverage through an online health insurance marketplace, such as Covered California. This additional federal assistance will lower the cost of monthly premiums — in some cases to $0 — for millions of people through December 2022, when this new provision expires (see next section).
  • Allows people who receive unemployment insurance (UI) benefits to sign up for certain health plans through an online health insurance marketplace with no monthly premium. This provision expires at the end of 2021.
  • Makes job-based “COBRA” coverage more affordable by allowing people who lose their job or have their hours reduced to keep or re-enroll in their employer-based health plan with no monthly premium. This provision expires on September 30, 2021.

How many Californians are expected to benefit from this new federal assistance?

According to state estimates, almost 3.1 million Californians qualify for the new federal premium subsidies through Covered California. Of these Californians:

  • 1.4 million are already enrolled in a Covered California plan and will automatically qualify for the new premium reductions, without any action needed on their part.
  • 430,000 have private insurance “off-exchange” (not through Covered California) and will qualify for the new premium reductions if they switch to a Covered California plan.
  • 1.2 million are uninsured, but will qualify for the new premium reductions if they sign up for a Covered California plan.

These numbers do not account for UI recipients, who are eligible for certain Covered California plans with a $0 premium, or for people who qualify for the COBRA subsidy to continue their job-based coverage with a $0 premium. It is unclear how many Californians fall into these two categories.

What financial impact will this new federal assistance have on Californians who purchase health insurance through Covered California?

The cost of plans purchased through Covered California will decline for consumers at all income levels. Many households with lower incomes will see the cost of their monthly premiums drop to less than 2% of their income, including down to $0. In addition, premiums will top out at 8.5% of income — a level that applies to households with incomes above 400% of the federal poverty line ($86,880 for a family of three). These higher-income households are not eligible for any federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which President Obama signed into law in 2010.

These changes will allow Californians who buy insurance through Covered California to save potentially thousands of dollars on premiums through the end of 2022. Families and individuals can use these resources to help pay for housing, child care, and other necessities during the recession as well as to build up their savings to help meet future expenses.

Premium reductions available under the ARP include the following:

  • A family of four earning 150% of the poverty line ($3,275 per month) will have no monthly premium for a Covered California plan. Prior to the ARP, this family would have contributed 4.14% of income, or $136 per month. Result: savings of around $2,700 from May 2021 to December 2022.
  • A couple earning 200% of the poverty line ($2,873 per month) will contribute 2.0% of their income, or $57, toward their monthly premium for a Covered California plan. Prior to the ARP, this couple would have contributed 6.52% of income, or $187 per month — a difference of $130 per month. Result: savings of roughly $2,600 from May 2021 to December 2022.
  • An individual earning 300% of the poverty line ($3,190 per month) will contribute 6.0% of their income, or $191, toward their monthly premium for a Covered California plan. Prior to the ARP, this individual would have contributed 8.9% of income, or $284 per month — a difference of $93 per month. Result: savings of about $1,860 from May 2021 to December 2022.

Federal Policymakers Provide Critical Funding for Public Health Infrastructure

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

Federal lawmakers authorized almost $93 billion for public health efforts in response to COVID-19, such as vaccine distribution, testing, contact tracing, and surveillance. The bill also makes critical investments to expand the public health workforce, including hiring additional contact tracers, nurses, epidemiologists, community health workers, and other essential staff to address COVID-19. An estimated $4.7 billion will be allocated to California.

How can the funding be used?

In California, the public health funding will be allocated for the following purposes:

  • $3.2 billion for COVID-19 testing, contact tracing, lab capacity, and other efforts to strengthen and expand activities and workforce related to genomic sequencing, analytics, and disease surveillance. 
  • $1.1 billion for community health centers to administer vaccines and conduct COVID-19 testing and contact tracing. 
  • $800 million to expand the state and local public health workforce, including case investigators, contact tracers, social support specialists, community health workers, public health nurses, disease intervention specialists, epidemiologists, program managers, laboratory personnel, informaticians, communication and policy experts, and any other positions that are required to prevent, prepare for, and respond to COVID-19.
  • $700 million for vaccine distribution, administration, and supplies (e.g., mobile vehicles and equipment to administer vaccinations). Funds can also be used to promote vaccinations or to hire and train staff to administer vaccines.

What is the timeline for using the funds?

Most of this funding is available until expended. 

What does this mean for California? 

Public health systems in California and at the national level have long been under-resourced and were inadequately prepared to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has brought devastation to many families and communities. Communities of color across the state particularly Black, Latinx, and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander Californians have experienced higher rates of illness and death from COVID-19 due to historic and ongoing structural racism that deny many communities the opportunity to be healthy and thrive. The intersection of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as structural racism has underscored the need to strengthen public health systems. While new funding for public health infrastructure brings the state closer to overcoming the pandemic, California leaders must prepare for and respond to other population health threats, including racism. Given that the goal of public health is to promote and protect the health of people and communities, public health leaders can also begin to minimize, neutralize, and dismantle the systems of racism that create inequalities in health for Californians.

The American Rescue Plan Strengthens California’s Medicaid Program (Medi-Cal)

What changes does the ARP make to Medicaid?

Medicaid provides health care coverage for people with low incomes. The program is funded with both federal and state dollars and is known as Medi-Cal in California. ARP provisions that strengthen the Medicaid program and will benefit Californians include the following:

  • Allows states to extend to 12 months pregnancy-related, postpartum Medicaid coverage, well beyond the current 60-day limit. States that take up this option would be required to provide full Medicaid benefits to women both during pregnancy and the 12-month postpartum period. This option would take effect on April 1, 2022, and would last for five years.
  • Builds on last year’s “Families First” federal relief package by directly requiring state Medicaid programs to cover COVID-19 testing, treatment, and vaccines at no cost to individuals. These requirements continue for approximately 15 months after the end of the COVID-19 public health emergency. During this same period, the federal government will pay the full cost for COVID-19 vaccine coverage and administration.
  • Temporarily boosts federal Medicaid funding for home and community-based services (HCBS), which help people remain in their homes and avoid institutional care. Each state will receive a 10 percentage-point increase to their federal matching rate for HCBS, except that the resulting federal matching rate may not exceed 95%. These increased funds are available for one year, beginning on April 1, 2021, and must be used to supplement, rather than to supplant, existing state funding for HCBS. Allowable uses of these temporary federal funds include, but are not limited to, home health care, personal care services, and rehabilitative services, including those related to behavioral health.
  • Temporarily provides 100% federal Medicaid funding for health services provided through Urban Indian Organizations and Native Hawaiian health care systems. This full federal funding is available for two years, beginning on April 1, 2021. California has a number of Urban Indian Organizations, including in Bakersfield, Fresno, Los Angeles, Oakland, Sacramento, and San Diego.

What would these changes mean for California?

The ARP health care provisions build on efforts to increase access to health care services, improve health outcomes, and overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. Under this law, people who receive health care services through Medi-Cal could continue to receive services up to a year after giving birth. Currently, this extension is limited to Californians who are diagnosed with a maternal mental health condition, such as postpartum depression. This policy change is critical in addressing maternal mortality and maternal mental health conditions, which disproportionately impact Black women and other women of color. In addition, the funding support for HCBS will help individuals live at home instead of in a nursing facility or another Medi-Cal funded institution. Without this investment, these individuals may not be able to remain in their homes, putting them at risk of being placed in group care facilities at a time when these settings may continue to pose a risk of contracting or dying from COVID-19. Lastly, the boost to Urban Indian Organizations and Native Hawaiian health care systems will help to improve health outcomes among American Indians across the state. Targeting investments to communities that have been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic due to historic and ongoing structural racism is an important step in advancing health equity.

Federal Policymakers Allocate Funding to Address Behavioral Health Needs that Have Increased During Pandemic

How much funding is available and how can it be used?

The ARP makes critical investments in behavioral health services — mental health care and/or treatment for substance use — which are primarily provided by counties, with funding from the state and federal governments. Specifically, the ARP allocates nearly $4 billion one-time funding for behavioral health prevention, services, and workforce training. This includes:

  • $1.5 billion in block grants for community-based mental health services. This funding will support state efforts to address needs and gaps in existing treatment services for children and adults with serious mental health conditions. Funds must be expended by September 30, 2025. 
  • $1.5 billion in block grants for community-based prevention and treatment of substance use. These funds will support state efforts to address ongoing prevention and treatment services for substance use. Funds must be expended by September 30, 2025.
  • $420 million for Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHCs). California currently hosts 11 CCBHCs, which provide or coordinate a range of mental health and substance use services with an emphasis on 24-hour crisis care, evidenced-based practices, and integration with physical health care. CCBHCs serve people with mental illness or substance use disorders of any severity (mild to moderate to severe), regardless of their ability to pay. 
  • $100 million to expand the behavioral health workforce through expanding education and training.
  • $80 million for community-based funding for local behavioral health and substance use disorder services.
  • $80 million to implement robust behavioral health and wellness education and awareness campaigns for health care professionals and first responders. 
  • $60 million for addressing behavioral health needs in children and youth, specifically for Project Advancing Wellness and Resiliency in Education (AWARE) state education agency grants, youth sucide prevention grants, and the National Child Traumatic Stress Network.

The law additionally provides funding for community-based mobile crisis intervention services, which are designed to respond to individuals experiencing a mental health crisis in a community setting. Meeting certain criteria, states will have a new option to provide these services with 85% federal matching funds for the first 3 years.

What is the timeline for using this funding?

There is no deadline to spend funds unless otherwise noted.

What does this mean for Californians?

The Biden Administration’s funding for behavioral health services as well as the behavioral health workforce is a critical step in supporting mental health and substance use needs, which have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many individuals in California and across the nation are dealing with stress, isolation, economic hardship, illness, and the loss of loved ones. During the pandemic, the share of individuals in the US experiencing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression has more than tripled. In California, nearly 2 in 5 adults reported symptoms of anxiety or depression during a two week period in March 2021. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of Californians were coping with mental health or substance use disorders and many confronted challenges in accessing services. State and federal policymakers must recognize that even after stay-at-home orders are lifted and economic recovery progresses, the work to support mental health and well-being will be far from over. Additionally, policymakers should consider the racial equity implications in future budget and policy deliberations related to behavioral health given that Californians of color have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic as well as the recession.

Housing & Homelessness

Federal Policymakers Provide Emergency Assistance for Renters and Homeowners

How does the American Rescue Plan help struggling renters stay in their homes? 

The ARP helps renters who are struggling to meet their housing needs, including paying for rent and utilities. This support includes:

  • $21.6 billion for emergency rental assistance —  California will receive an estimated $2.2 billion. These funds will help struggling renter households pay back rent accumulated since April 2020 and keep up on current rent, for a maximum of 18 months of support. Households must have incomes below 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), have lost income or experienced other financial hardship due to COVID-19, and face a risk of homelessness or housing instability. Californians who are undocumented or live in mixed-status households are eligible for assistance. Funds will be available through September 2025. These funds add to the $25 billion ($2.6 billion for California) in emergency rental assistance included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 enacted in December 2020. The timeline for using these earlier emergency rental assistance funds was also extended through September 2022.
  • $5 billion for emergency housing vouchers —  California will receive an estimated $500 million. Housing vouchers will provide longer-term rental assistance for Californians who are at risk of or currently experiencing homelessness or who are fleeing domestic violence or human trafficking. These vouchers, administered by public housing authorities, can be used by a household for as long as that household requires assistance but cannot be reissued to new households after September 2023.
  • $5 billion for utilities assistance —  California will receive an estimated $200 million. California renters with low incomes will receive assistance covering utility costs including electricity, gas, and water. Funds will be distributed through the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and through the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP) that was newly created through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021.

How does the ARP help struggling homeowners stay in their homes?

The American Rescue Plan includes $10 billion for homeowners experiencing financial hardship due to COVID-19 to help them avoid foreclosure and displacement. California will receive an estimated $1 billion. This financial assistance can be used for mortgage payments, utilities, insurance, and other housing costs related to preventing foreclosure. At least 60% of the funds must be targeted to homeowners with incomes equal to or less than 100% of AMI or 100% of median income for the United States, whichever is greater. Funds are available through September 2025.

How else does the ARP address housing needs? 

The American Rescue Plan includes $750 million for tribal nations and Native Hawaiians to provide emergency housing assistance for Native American, Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian households living in tribal areas or on home lands, adding to funds provided in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. Also included is $100 million for emergency rental assistance for households living in federally-financed rural housing, available through September 2022, as well as $100 million for housing counseling services and $20 million to enforce fair housing laws.

What does this mean for California?

These one-time federal funds offer critical support to help Californians who are struggling to afford housing costs, which is especially important for renters, households with lower incomes, Black and Latinx Californians, and Californians who are undocumented — who faced serious housing affordability challenges even before the pandemic, and are likely to continue to face these challenges after COVID-19 as well. Emergency rental assistance and housing vouchers are especially important with California’s eviction moratorium currently set to expire at the end of June 2021.

Policymakers Provide Flexible One-Time Funding for Individuals Experiencing Homelessness

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

To address the needs of individuals experiencing homelessness, the American Rescue Plan provides $5 billion in flexible funding distributed through the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. California will receive an estimated $500 million.

How can the funding be used?

Funds can be used for a variety of activities, including developing affordable or supportive housing, providing short-term rental assistance, and providing support services for people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Funds can also be used to acquire commercial properties such as hotels and motels in order to convert them to non-congregate emergency shelter, affordable housing, or supportive housing, similar to California’s Homekey program.

What are the timelines for using the funds?

The homelessness assistance funds are available through September 2025.

What does this mean for California?

These one-time federal funds will help California meet the needs of the more than 160,000 Californians facing homelessness each night. Meeting these needs is especially critical during the pandemic, which exacerbates the health and public health risks for people experiencing homelessness. At the same time, effectively addressing California’s homelessness crisis over the long term — including the particularly inequitable impact on Black Californians — will require ongoing support, through state and federal funds, at a scale that meets the size of the challenge.

Education

American Rescue Plan Provides Aid to Support K-12 Education

How much K-12 education funding will California receive from the American Rescue Plan (ARP)?

The ARP provides $122 billion in fiscal aid to local K-12 school districts and state departments of education  based on the proportion of Title I, Part A funding that each state received in 2020. Title I, Part A funding is determined primarily by the number and share of children in local K-12 school districts below the federal poverty line. California will receive $15.1 billion of these ARP dollars, including:

  • A minimum of $13.6 billion that will be distributed directly to local K-12 school districts, county offices of education (COE), and charter schools – local educational agencies (LEAs) – in proportion to the share of Title I, Part A dollars that each of these LEAs received in 2020.
  • No more than $1.5 billion of that will be reserved for the California Department of Education (CDE). 

How can the funding be used?

At least 20% of the additional federal funding distributed to LEAs must be used for evidenced-based interventions that are responsive to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student groups such as English learners and children from low-income families. The remaining funding distributed to LEAs may be used for a wide range of activities to address needs arising from the pandemic such as: 

  • hiring new staff;
  • purchasing educational technology for students that aids in substantive educational interaction between students and classroom instructors; 
  • planning and implementing activities related to summer learning and supplemental after-school programs; and
  • improving indoor air quality.

In federal fiscal years 2021-22 and 2022-23, LEAs that receive the new federal funds may not reduce funding per student from state and local sources, or staffing levels, for any of its high-poverty schools – defined as the 25% of schools that serve the highest percentage of economically disadvantaged students – by an amount greater than reductions per student for the entire LEA.

How soon will the funding arrive and what is the timeline for using it?

On March 24, 2021, the US Department of Education (DOE) released $10 billion of the $15.1 billion California will receive from the ARP. The remaining dollars will become available after California submits a plan for how it will use the funds to the US DOE. The additional funding for K-12 school districts, COEs, charter schools, and the CDE will be available to spend through September 30, 2024.

What does this mean for California? 

California’s K-12 school districts, COEs, and charter schools will receive a sizable increase in federal funding. By targeting dollars to LEAs with large shares of economically disadvantaged students, and providing flexibility in how the funds can be used, the new federal funding means LEAs will have significant financial resources to support students who have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic. However, because the funding for K-12 education is a one-time boost, LEAs face challenges that include how to effectively use the large amount of additional dollars and avoid hardships when they are no longer available.

Emergency Relief Provides Financial Aid to Students Most Harmed by the Pandemic

How much funding is available and how much will California receive?

Federal lawmakers authorized nearly $40 billion dollars in grants that will go directly to institutions of higher education (IHEs). The funds include $3 billion for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and other Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs). California IHEs will receive an estimated $5 billion and will be allocated based on the relative shares of: 

  • Federal Pell Grant recipients;
  • Non-Pell Grant recipients; and
  • Federal Pell and non-Pell Grant recipients exclusively enrolled in online education prior to the pandemic emergency. 

How can the funding be used?

IHEs receiving funds must allocate at least 50% of the funds as emergency financial aid grants to students — with the only exception of for-profit IHEs, which will have to spend 100% of the funds on student aid. Grants to students can be used for any component of the student’s cost of attendance and emergency costs due to the pandemic, such as tuition, food, housing, health care, and child care. IHEs are responsible for determining how to award grants to students, but they are required to prioritize students with the greatest need. Allocations to not for profit IHEs include flexible funds that can be used for immediate needs related to the health emergency, including: 

  • Lost revenue; 
  • Additional financial aid grants to students;
  • Reimbursement for expenses already incurred;
  • Technology costs due to distance learning;
  • Faculty and staff professional development; and 
  • Payroll.

Additionally, IHEs are required to use a portion of their dollars to implement evidence-based practices to mitigate COVID-19. IHEs are also required to conduct direct outreach to students about the opportunity for a financial aid adjustment for more aid due to recent unemployment of a family member or changes in financial circumstances. Provisions in the ARP do not appear to restrict an IHE’s ability to provide aid to students based on their immigration status. 

How soon will the funding arrive and what is the timeline for using it?

The ARP specifies that funds will be available for use by IHEs through September 30, 2023

What does this mean for California? 

The federal aid earmarked for higher education means that California colleges and universities will be able to provide direct aid to students most harmed by the pandemic, especially those experiencing housing and food insecurity, loss in household income, and other hardships due to the health crisis. The ARP will also help colleges and universities return to in-person instruction and address immediate needs related to the pandemic, such as increased costs and lost revenues. Lastly, the financial resources available to IHEs over the next couple of years will help address the prolonged and disproportionate effects of the pandemic for low-income households and communities of color.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed many Californians and Americans to unprecedented economic instability, but many women in California were already struggling to pay the bills prior to the onset of the economic crisis. According to the California Women’s Well-Being Index, in a five-year period leading up to the COVID-19 pandemic, many women across the state were experiencing economic hardship — and this was happening during the longest period of economic growth on record. California women faced a significant wage gap, and women were more likely than men to earn low wages and to live in poverty. Pre-pandemic hardship and lack of economic security was particularly acute for American Indian, Black, Latinx, and Pacific Islander women in California.

Policy barriers and discrimination have blocked women from economic opportunities, including the ability to save money or build assets, and many women in California are not in the position to weather a financial crisis. Even so, the COVID-19 recession was the first recession in which more women than men lost jobs, and Black and Latinx women and women who are immigrants lost their jobs at especially high rates in the early months of the pandemic. Now, nearly one year into the COVID-19 recession, many women in California face harsh realities as they scramble to pay for everyday expenses after losing jobs and household income.

More Than 6 in 10 Latinx and Black Women in California Live in Households That Lost Earnings During the Pandemic.

Over half of women in California were living in households this past fall that lost employment income after mid-March 2020, reflecting the depth of job loss in California. Latinx and Black women have been far more likely to feel the economic effects of the recession. More than 6 in 10 Latinx and Black women were living in households that lost earnings during the pandemic. As of December 2020, the state still had 1.5 million fewer jobs than in February, the month before the COVID-19 recession began.

Many Women of Color in California Are Struggling to Get By During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Economic Crisis

Lost jobs and earnings have stretched California household budgets. This past fall, more than 1 in 3 women in California lived in households that found it somewhat or very difficult to pay for usual expenses, such as rent, utilities, food, and child care. Black, Latinx, and most other women of color have found it especially difficult to get by with more than 4 in 10 living in households that were struggling to pay the bills this past fall. Data also show that Latinx, Black, and most other women of color were also far more likely to live in households that were behind on their rent or mortgage payment and in households struggling to afford enough food.

Nearly Half of Women in California Have Reported Symptoms of Anxiety or Depression During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Individuals across the state and nation are dealing with a caregiving crisis, isolation, economic hardship, illness, and the loss of loved ones. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a toll beyond the risk of contracting the virus. In the US, the share of individuals experiencing symptoms of anxiety and/or depression has more than tripled during the pandemic. In California this past fall, nearly half of women were coping with these mental health conditions. For women experiencing multiple economic hardships — such as the loss of household income or the inability to pay for food or housing — three-quarters reported symptoms of anxiety and/or depression.

California Policymakers Must Center Women in an Equitable Economic Recovery

Many women were locked out of the state’s prosperity well before the pandemic and have been hit especially hard by the COVID-19 pandemic and recession. A brighter future begins with an equitable economic recovery that centers women — particularly women of color — in pandemic relief and recovery efforts. To start, California leaders should:

  • Boost women’s economic security, especially women who are immigrants who have been blocked from federal COVID relief efforts, so women and their families can meet their basic needs.
  • Ensure that women have access to health care services — including mental health care — during and after the pandemic via in-person or telehealth services.
  • Help workers balance career and caregiving responsibilities — particularly women with low incomes who are far less likely to have employer-provided benefits.

It is time for state leaders to invest in women, their families, and communities. When women thrive, their families and communities, and our state prosper.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Executive Summary

The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the depths and reach of racism on the health of children, families, and individuals, with communities of color in California experiencing higher rates of illness, death, and overall hardship due to the virus. This devastation must be the catalyst for California policymakers to acknowledge that racism has caused lasting and negative impacts on communities of color. While some local policymakers in California have declared racism as a public health crisis, there has not been a declaration at the state level. This Report provides a high level overview on how health inequities are a direct consequence of historic and ongoing racism. The integration of racist policies and practices in various systems — specifically housing, environment, employment, health care, justice system, and education — prevents many communities the opportunity to be healthy and thrive. Only by first declaring racism a public health crisis can we then begin to minimize, neutralize, and dismantle the systems of racism that create inequalities in health for Californians.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted Black and brown communities, exposing the damaging effects of racism in California. This was not by accident, but by design.

In this report, you’ll find:

  • California & COVID-19: Why Policymakers Must Declare Racism a Public Health Crisis
  • Communities of Color Are Hardest Hit by COVID-19 Pandemic
  • Health Inequities Are Tied to Structural Racism
  • How Does Everyday Racial Discrimination Harm the Health of People of Color?
  • Federal, State, and Local Policies and Practices Rooted in Racism Have Produced an Inequitable California
  • Racism Has Produced an Inequitable California

Key Terms

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

California Is Still Down More Jobs Than the State Lost During the Great RecessionCalifornia is losing jobs again. As COVID-19 cases surged in late 2020 and new restrictions affecting businesses had to be put in place, California began to lose jobs again for the first time since the pandemic began. This deepened the massive hole in the state’s job market. In total, California had 1.5 million fewer jobs in December than in February 2020, the month before the COVID-19 recession began. As 2020 came to an end – and 10 months into the COVID-19 recession – California was still down more jobs than the state lost during the Great Recession. It’s unlikely that California’s job picture has improved much since December given that strict COVID-19 restrictions remained in place to address high COVID-19 case rates until late January.

Jobs in Low-Paying Industries Declined in December and Are Still Down Much More Jobs in Higher-Paying Industries

Low-paid workers continue to be hit hardest. Workers in California’s lowest-paying private-sector industries lost more than 100,000 jobs in December, while those in higher-paying industries gained jobs. Most layoffs occurred in the very low-paying leisure and hospitality industry, which largely includes jobs at restaurants. This new round of layoffs for California workers continued the uneven pattern of job losses that has occurred all throughout the recession. Low-paying industries still had 15% fewer jobs in December than in February, while moderate- and high-paying industries had just 5% and 3% fewer jobs, respectively.


About 3 in 5 Latinx and Black Households in California Lost Earnings During the Pandemic

Layoffs during the pandemic have reduced the earnings of the majority of Black and brown households. About 3 in 5 Latinx and Black households in California lost earnings during the pandemic as of late 2020. In contrast, well under half of Asian and white households lost earnings. Although federal policymakers enhanced unemployment benefits and provided two rounds of economic relief payments last year, millions of Californians report difficulty paying for basic expenses like food in part because these benefits haven’t been enough to cover the cost of living. Additionally, benefits haven’t reached everyone in need, including undocumented Californians who are blocked from support by state and federal policies.


Federal and State Policymakers Need to Do Much More to Help Workers Now & Beyond the Recession

Many Californians – particularly Black and brown workers and those who are paid low wages – will continue to face economic and health challenges for some time. Although vaccines are available to start addressing the pandemic, it will take time to reach herd immunity – when most of the population is immune to COVID-19 – and economists predict it will take years for all of the workers displaced by the recession to find new jobs. Moreover, as COVID-19 business restrictions are lifted and people who have lost jobs return to work, workers’ health – and the health of their families and communities – could be compromised until they have access to the vaccines. People going back to jobs that put them at risk of contracting COVID-19 are largely Californians of color whose communities have already experienced higher rates of illness and death from the virus. These facts highlight the urgent need for federal and state policymakers to 1) provide more economic relief so that workers and their families can meet basic needs and 2) make long-term investments that promote health and economic security so that all Californians can thrive.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Introduction

Almost 17 million Californians — 44% of all state residents — live in homes that are rented. As the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have unfolded, the urgent needs of California’s renters have rightly received significant attention, including calls for eviction moratoriums, rental assistance, and production of more affordable housing. Many of the millions of workers who have lost jobs fear missing rent payments and losing a safe home for their families at a time when having a safe and stable home is especially vital for both personal health and public health. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic and recession, when the state’s economy was booming, millions of California renters struggled to afford the high cost of their housing. In the coming months, California’s local, state, and federal policymakers will have choices and decisions to make about how to address the needs of renters through proposed changes in laws and new policy proposals.

To inform these choices, this Issue Brief addresses a few key questions:

  • Why do California’s renters face an increased risk of housing instability and homelessness?
  • How do renters’ housing crises affect individuals’ health during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond?
  • Which Californians are most likely to be renters?
  • And who are the Californians most likely to be affected by the policy choices that local, state, and federal policymakers can make for renters?

Support for this Issue Brief was provided by First 5 California.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Introduction

On January 8, Governor Gavin Newsom released his proposed 2021-22 state budget, drawing on stronger-than-expected revenues to call for a series of emergency investments to respond to the public health and economic impacts of the pandemic and provide modest relief for Californians. These much-needed emergency investments, which the governor calls for the Legislature to enact as quickly as possible in the coming weeks, include providing $600 in one-time assistance for Californians with low incomes, extending the state’s eviction moratorium, putting steps in place to reopen schools, and providing small business assistance through loans and tax credits. 

While the administration’s proposals seek to address the challenges confronting many Californians amid the pandemic, the proposed spending plan misses opportunities to address other urgent and ongoing basic needs of Californians, particularly Californians with low incomes and people of color, and particularly where investments would help to allay the health and financial strains that millions of Californians will face in the months and years to come. Notable missed opportunities include:

  • Providing no new or ongoing funding for local public health departments to ensure that they have the resources they need to respond to COVID-19 and other threats to population health.
  • Failing to extend comprehensive health coverage to undocumented seniors with low incomes, who are at high risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19. 
  • Limiting investments in a child care system that was inadequately funded before the pandemic and now confronts a crisis in the loss of providers and facilities, such that the ability of many Californians, particularly people of color, to return to the workforce will be constrained by their lack of access to affordable and quality child care.
  • Failing to provide ongoing funding to prevent and combat homelessness at scale beyond the one-time support included in the governor’s proposal.

In addition, the proposed budget notably fails to recognize that the state’s unexpectedly strong fiscal health results from dramatic and widening economic inequality, where the wealthiest individuals and corporations are thriving while Californians with low and middle incomes, and particularly Black and brown Californians and other people of color, are struggling more than ever to make ends meet. California’s substantial, but concentrated, wealth means that our state can afford to make the investments needed for a more equitable recovery. State policymakers have an opportunity to put a budget plan in place that, with additional revenue and appropriate borrowing and reserves, invests in the immediate and future health and economic security of all Californians, makes the state’s tax system more equitable, and in so doing, positions our state to more quickly and equitably emerge from the recession and pandemic.

While state leaders may be inclined to rely upon stronger-than-expected revenues and the uncertain prospect of federal resources, they must recognize the need to take bolder action to provide greater state support to Californians, local governments, and communities across our state hardest hit by the pandemic. 

This report outlines key pieces of the 2021-22 budget proposal, with consideration for how the plan supports — or does not meet the needs of — Californians with low incomes, as well as women, Black Californians, Latinx Californians, American Indians, Pacific Islander Californians, Asian Californians, and other Californians of color. 

Contents

Budget Overview

Health

Homelessness & Housing

Economic Security

Education

Justice System

Other Proposals


Budget Overview

Governor’s Economic Outlook Is Bleak, Especially for Workers in Low-Paying Industries

California and the United States remain deep into the worst recession in generations and the financial situation for many people has worsened as the nation recently began to lose jobs again due to spiking COVID-19 cases. Job losses throughout the recession have been concentrated in industries that pay low wages and have hit Asian, Black, and Latinx workers, as well as women, particularly hard.

The governor’s economic outlook expects Californians to gain back jobs slowly, with the total number of jobs in the state not returning to pre-pandemic levels until 2025. The forecast also expects that increased automation and the shift to online retail will permanently eliminate some jobs in the low-paying leisure and hospitality, retail, and “other services” industries. This means that some unemployed workers will not have jobs to come back to once the pandemic is over and will have to find employment elsewhere. For this reason, the administration projects that employment in these industries will remain below their pre-pandemic levels beyond 2025. The outlook also points out that the recent approval of Proposition 22, which allowed gig economy companies to classify their workers as independent contractors, will lead to a decline in the quality of many jobs in the state.

It is important to consider that the governor’s outlook may be overly pessimistic because it did not take into account the impact of the federal economic relief bill that was enacted in December. This means, for example, that it incorrectly assumed that millions of Californians would lose access to unemployment benefits beginning late last year. That said, the administration points to a number of factors that could cause the economic outlook to worsen, including more widespread job losses than anticipated, more business closures than expected, or a “failure to address structural inequality.”

Governor’s Proposal Assumes Higher Revenues than Anticipated and a One-Time Windfall, but Deficits Ahead

The 2020-21 budget agreement enacted in June included actions to close a $54 billion budget gap that was projected as a result of expected revenue losses and spending increases due to the COVID-19 pandemic and recession. However, the governor’s 2021-22 budget proposal reflects an improved revenue outlook over the 2020 Budget Act assumptions and a one-time $15 billion “windfall” that can be allocated during the current budget cycle. The administration’s estimate of the windfall is significantly lower than the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) November estimate of $26 billion, although the LAO estimated that the actual windfall could range from $12 billion to $40 billion, depending on economic conditions.

This improved outlook and windfall are due to two main factors. First, while many Californians are facing severe struggles in the COVID-19 economy, those with high incomes have continued to fare well, and this group is responsible for a large share of the state’s General Fund revenue due to the progressive personal income tax (PIT) system. Second, the recession has been less severe than expected, largely due to federal assistance to workers, families, and businesses. As a result, the administration projects General Fund revenue will be $71 billion higher than anticipated in the 2020 Budget Act over the three-year budget period, covering fiscal years 2019-20 through 2021-22. This includes higher estimates over the budget period for the three primary General Fund revenue sources, including $58 billion in personal income tax revenue, $9 billion in sales tax revenue, and $1.3 billion in corporation tax revenue.

The budget proposal warns that the revenue situation could deteriorate in the case of a sharp decline in the stock market, a rise in bankruptcy, or more widespread unemployment affecting higher-income Californians. The proposal also notes that the revenue estimates were completed prior to the enactment of the recent federal COVID-19 relief package, which should reduce the likelihood of a more severe recession scenario in the short-term.

Although the outlook for the current budget is improved, the administration conservatively projects that the three main General Fund revenue sources will grow by only 1.9% annually between 2019-20 and 2024-25, significantly slower than the 6.4% average growth rate since 2009-10. Additionally, expenditures are expected to grow faster than revenues over this time, resulting in a structural deficit of $7.6 billion for 2022-23, growing to $11 billion by 2024-25 without actions to increase revenues, reduce spending, or a combination of the two.

Stronger-Than-Expected Revenues Allow State to Build Reserves to $22 Billion

California has a number of state reserve accounts, some of which are established in the state’s Constitution to require deposits and restrict withdrawals, and some of which 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 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 Proposition 98 funding guarantee (see section on Proposition 98).

The BSA is not California’s only reserve fund. Each year, the state deposits additional funds into a “Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties” (SFEU). Additionally, the 2018-19 budget agreement created the Safety Net Reserve Fund, which holds funds that can be used to maintain benefits and services for CalWORKs and Medi-Cal participants in the event of an economic downturn.

The enacted 2020-21 budget projected drawing down $8.8 billion in reserves — $7.8 billion of $16.1 billion in available funds from the BSA; all of approximately $500 million in the PSSSA; and $450 million of the available $900 million in the Safety Net Reserve — based on projections of declining revenues due to the pandemic. The enacted budget also projected that $2.6 billion would remain in the SFEU as of June 30, 2021.

However, stronger-than-expected revenue collections result in changes to the BSA, PSSSA, and SFEU balances for the prior fiscal year (2019-20), the current fiscal year (2020-21), and projections in the governor’s proposed 2021-22 budget. The proposed budget estimates a total BSA balance of $12.5 billion in 2020-21, growing to $15.6 billion in 2021-22, and a PSSSA balance of $747 million in 2020-21, growing to $3 billion in 2021-22. The SFEU balance is estimated to be $9 billion as of June 30, 2021, declining to $2.9 billion as of June 30, 2022. In addition, the proposed budget maintains the Safety Net Reserve at $450 million.

Taking into account the BSA, PSSSA, Safety Net Reserve, and SFEU, the governor’s proposal would build state reserves to a total of $22 billion in 2021-22.

Budget Proposal Continues to Pay Down Unfunded Liabilities

The governor’s budget proposal includes required contributions to two state-run retirement systems: the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS). CalPERS and CalSTRS, like many retirement systems, are not funded at levels that will keep up with future benefits guaranteed to workers, resulting in the state needing to make higher annual contributions in order to pay down unfunded liabilities. In recent budget agreements, state leaders have also agreed to make supplemental payments to the two systems in order to help pay down those unfunded liabilities.

The governor’s proposed budget includes the required contributions to CalPERS ($5.5 billion total, $3.0 billion General Fund) and CalSTRS ($3.9 billion General Fund). In addition, the administration proposes to make one-time supplemental payments in 2021-22 to CalPERS ($1.5 billion) and CalSTRS ($410 million) using funding set aside by Prop. 2 for paying down budgetary debt. If Prop. 2 revenues for paying down budgetary debt are available in future years, the administration projects that the state will be able to make additional supplemental payments of $4.1 billion to CalPERS and $602 million to CalSTRS over the 2022-23 to 2024-25 fiscal years. (See Reserves section for more on Prop. 2.

Health

Proposed Budget Provides Funds for COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, But Does Not Include New Investments for Local Public Health Departments

As the state approaches almost one year into the pandemic, over 2.8 million Californians have tested positive for COVID-19 and over 31,000 Californians have died due to COVID-19 — a devastating and immeasurable loss for families and communities across the state. Communities of color, particularly Black, Latinx, and Pacific Islander Californians, have been disproportionately impacted due to long standing inequities. Since the start of the pandemic, the administration has taken steps to mitigate the spread of the virus and protect the health of Californians. Efforts include issuing stay-at-home orders, ramping up testing for the virus, securing personal protective equipment, increasing hospital capacity, and implementing a health equity metric that requires counties to address COVID-19 health inequities in their economic reopening plans. 

The proposed budget continues efforts to overcome the pandemic. Specifically, the budget includes:

  • Over $820 million General Fund to continue COVID-19 response measures such as laboratory capacity and testing, surveillance, response, and prevention. This builds on previous emergency and federal funding that was processed as of late fall 2020.
  • About $300 million for vaccine distribution, including a public awareness campaign to increase vaccine distribution. The administration anticipates receiving an additional $350 million in federal funds for this effort. The budget summary does not state whether or not federal funds will supplement or supplant the $300 million in state funds for vaccine distribution.

While the budget consists of much-needed COVID-19-related support, no new funding for local public health departments is included. Public health officials throughout the state have expressed that more support is needed to adequately bolster public health infrastructure. Ensuring that local public health departments have the resources needed to combat COVID-19 and other threats to population health is vital. California and federal leaders must work together to provide additional resources and coordination needed to help communities adequately respond to the virus and to prepare for future threats.

Proposed Budget Fails to Expand Medi-Cal Coverage to Undocumented Seniors, Delays Potential Suspension of State Funding for Medi-Cal Provider Payments

Building on the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA), California has substantially expanded access to health coverage in recent years. For example, more than 13 million Californians with modest incomes — half of whom are Latinx — receive free or low-cost health care through Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program), several million more than before the ACA took effect. In addition, over 1.3 million Californians with incomes up to 600% of the federal poverty line ($76,560 for an individual) receive federal subsidies, state subsidies, or both in order to reduce the cost of coverage purchased through Covered California, our state’s health insurance marketplace. Despite these gains, millions of people — including undocumented immigrants — remain uninsured, health care costs continue to rise, and many Californians continue to face high monthly premiums and excessive out-of-pocket costs — such as copays and deductibles —  when they use health care services. 

The proposed budget:

  • Fails to propose an expansion of comprehensive Medi-Cal coverage to seniors regardless of immigration status — even in the midst of a deadly pandemic that is disproportionately affecting older adults. In recent years, California has extended full-scope Medi-Cal coverage to undocumented immigrants under age 26 who otherwise qualify for the program. One year ago, Governor Newsom proposed to expand this state policy to include undocumented adults age 65 or older, but he withdrew this proposal in May and continues to exclude it from his 2021-22 spending plan. As a result, under the governor’s proposed budget, seniors who are undocumented would remain locked out of full-scope Medi-Cal coverage a time when preventive health services and treatment for chronic health conditions are needed most, particularly given that older adults are most at risk of severe illness from COVID-19 and even death. By failing to expand Medi-Cal to undocumented seniors, the governor misses an opportunity provide these older adults with an affordable, regular source of care, which could help to improve their health status as well as their chances of recovering from COVID-19.
  • Delays, to 2022, the potential suspension of state funding for a wide array of programs and services that boost access to care and generally support Californians’ health and well-being, including certain Medi-Cal provider payments. The state budget for the current fiscal year made more than $1 billion in state spending subject to suspension in the 2021-22 fiscal year if certain conditions are met. These suspensions would take effect on either July 1, 2021, or December 31, 2021, depending on the program. The largest item on the list: supplemental payments for providers in the Medi-Cal program. This suspension would reduce state General Fund spending on Medi-Cal by nearly $760 million in 2021-22, but could impede Medi-Cal beneficiaries’ access to services if some providers stopped accepting Medi-Cal patients due to the payment cut. However, the governor proposes to prevent any health and human services suspensions from taking effect in 2021-22 by shifting the effective dates forward by one year — to July 1, 2022, and December 31, 2022.
  • Projects that average monthly enrollment in Medi-Cal will increase from 14 million in 2020-21 to 15.6 million in 2021-22 — covering nearly 40% of the state’s population. This substantial year-over-year growth is due to the devastating economic downturn and job losses triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, which continue to cause Californians to lose access to job-based health coverage. This caseload increase is projected to increase Medi-Cal spending by $13.5 billion ($4.3 billion General Fund) in 2021-22.
  • Proposes to create an “Office of Health Care Affordability.” This new office would have a wide array of functions, including boosting price transparency, developing cost targets for various sectors of the health care industry, and establishing financial penalties to enforce compliance. The governor proposes to use revenues from the Health Data and Planning Fund — $11.2 million in 2021-22, $24.5 million in 2022-23, and $27.3 million in 2023-24 and ongoing — to establish and support the activities of this new office.
  • Proposes to expand and make permanent certain “telehealth” flexibilities for Medi-Cal providers. This proposal would also add “remote patient monitoring” as a new Medi-Cal benefit, effective July 1, 2021, for a total cost of $94.8 million ($34 million General Fund) in 2021-22. These changes would “expand access to preventative services and improve health outcomes,” according to the governor’s budget summary.

Proposed Budget Revives Ambitious Effort to Improve Health Outcomes Through Medi-Cal Reform

The administration launched an ambitious reform effort known as CalAIM (California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal) in late 2019, but postponed the initiative’s implementation due to COVID-19. Building on previous pilot programs, CalAIM aims to coordinate physical health, behavioral health, and social services in a patient-centered manner with the goal of improving health and well-being, otherwise known as the “whole person care” approach. It also aims to improve quality outcomes, reduce health disparities, reduce complexity across all delivery systems, and implement value-based initiatives and payment reform. 

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. As such, CalAIM positions the state to take a population health, person-centered approach to providing services, and potentially reduces health care costs.

The administration assumes that implementation of these various reforms would begin on January 1, 2022, and that $1.1 billion ($531.9 million General Fund) would be available during the initial fiscal year (2021-22) to:

  • Provide enhanced care management – a collaborative approach to providing intensive and comprehensive services to individuals; 
  • Support “in lieu of” services, which include housing transition services, recuperative care, and respite; 
  • Fund infrastructure needed to expand “whole person care” programs statewide; 
  • Build upon existing dental initiatives, such as the Dental Transformation Initiative, which aims to expand preventive dental services for children.

Substantial reforms to the Medi-Cal program as well as the level of federal funding that will be provided must be negotiated with the federal government through the Medicaid waiver process. As such, CalAIM implementation will depend on the availability of funding and federal approval.

Governor Proposes Investments in the State’s Behavioral Health System

Behavioral health services — mental health care and/or treatment for substance use — are primarily provided by California’s 58 counties, with funding from the state and federal governments. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, Californians with behavioral health conditions confronted many challenges in accessing services that are delivered by multiple complex systems. The increased stress, grief, isolation, and depression highlight the need to prepare for a possible behavioral health crisis on the horizon. Given that Californians of color have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, state policymakers should consider the racial equity implications in future budget and policy deliberations related to behavioral health.

The administration recognizes the toll on health and well-being that COVID-19 has taken, particularly on students, and proposes several budget proposals to support behavioral health. Specifically, the administration’s proposed budget includes: 

  • $750 million one-time General Fund, available over three years, for competitive grants to support acquisition and rehabilitation of properties for behavioral health treatment facilities, including community-based residential facilities. (See the Homelessness and Housing section for additional information.) 
  • $400 million one-time in a mix of state and federal funding, available over multiple years, to implement a program intended to increase the number of students receiving behavioral health services from K-12 schools. The Department of Health Care Services would implement this program through Medi-Cal managed care plans, in partnership with county behavioral health departments and schools.
  • $27.1 million General Fund for a one-year delayed suspension of Medi-Cal post-partum extended eligibility, which extends the duration of Medi-Cal eligibility for postpartum care for an individual who is diagnosed with a maternal mental health condition.   
  • $25 million one-time from the Mental Health Services Fund to expand the Mental Health Student Services Act Partnership Grant Program, which funds partnerships between county behavioral health departments and schools.
  • $25 million ongoing Proposition 98 General Fund to fund county behavioral health partnerships that support student mental health services. 

Homelessness & Housing

Governor Proposes Addressing Homelessness Through One-Time Spending to Acquire Housing Units and Residential Facilities

California has more than 25% of the nation’s population of homeless individuals, with approximately 150,000 homeless residents on a given night as of January 2019. Black Californians bear a disproportionate burden of homelessness, making up nearly 1 in 3 residents experiencing homelessness but only 6% of the overall state population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals experiencing homelessness face increased risk of exposure to the virus and significant barriers to following public health guidelines to protect their health and prevent the virus from spreading. 

The governor’s budget proposal highlights investments the state has made to date with state and federal dollars to address shelter needs during the pandemic. In 2021-22, the governor proposes substantial one-time spending to “further develop a broader portfolio of housing needed to end homelessness” by acquiring and rehabilitating hotels/motels and residential facilities. Specifically, the budget proposal includes:

  • $750 million one-time General Fund (with $250 million available through early action before June) to continue property acquisitions through the Homekey program. Funds would continue to be administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as competitive grants for local jurisdictions to acquire and rehabilitate hotels, motels, and other buildings and to convert them into interim or permanent housing for individuals experiencing homelessness.  
  • $750 million one-time General Fund, available over three years, to support the acquisition and rehabilitation of properties for behavioral health treatment facilities, including community-based residential facilities. Funds would be administered by the Department of Health Care Services as competitive grants to counties, with a local match required, producing an estimated minimum of 5,000 beds, units, or rooms. The Administration also proposes to explore redirecting $202 million in relinquished adult jail bond financing to support the purchase or modification of short-term residential mental health facilities.
  • $250 million one-time General Fund for the acquisition or rehabilitation of Adult Residential Facilities (ARF) and Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE), specifically to secure housing for low-income seniors. These facilities would provide housing, personal care, and supervision (including medication management) for individuals who are unable to live by themselves but do not need 24-hour nursing care. Funds would be available to counties through the Department of Social Services. 

Additional new investments to prevent and address homelessness include one-time funds to address student hunger and homelessness at California Community Colleges and the California State University (see Community Colleges and California State University and University of California sections). The governor also points to the CalAIM proposal to transform Medi-Cal in order to better meet the needs of individuals with complex and high needs, such as individuals experiencing homelessness, through strategies that include addressing social determinants of health, including meeting housing needs (see CalAIM section).

The governor’s budget proposal does not include substantial ongoing state funding specifically to address homelessness, though advocates and legislators have identified ongoing funding at scale as a priority to successfully address California’s homelessness crisis.

Governor Proposes Extending Eviction Moratorium, Investing in Housing Development to Stimulate Economy

Even before the COVID-19 recession, more than half of California’s renter households had unaffordable housing costs. Since the start of the pandemic, millions of Californians have lost jobs, with employment losses concentrated among lower-wage workers, who are least likely to have savings to cover housing costs in the face of lost income. As of December 2020, more than 6 in 10 California adults reported having difficulty paying for usual household expenses, like rent.

To address the urgent needs of renters during the pandemic, Governor Newsom proposes immediate action to extend the state eviction moratorium beyond its current expiration date of January 31, 2021. The governor notes that the federal COVID-19 relief bill enacted in December makes approximately $2.6 billion in assistance available for rent (including back rent) and utility expenses for California renters with low incomes.

The governor’s budget proposal also includes two major one-time investments to support housing development:

  • $500 million one-time General Fund for the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program (with $250 million proposed for early action before June). This investment is intended to stimulate economic recovery and job creation while facilitating housing development in infill locations.
  • $500 million for expansion of the state’s Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program, which supports affordable housing development. This proposal would maintain LIHTC tax expenditures for the third year in a row at the boosted level first adopted in the 2019-20 budget.

The governor also proposes continuing to streamline the state’s housing funding programs, with $2.7 million General Fund allocated to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to support this effort, while also working to improve alignment across the state’s housing finance programs. In addition, the governor proposes creating a new Housing Accountability Unit within HCD to increase the state’s focus on supporting local jurisdictions and holding them accountable for meeting their housing planning goals, with $4.3 million General Fund proposed to support technical assistance and proactive engagement provided through this new unit.

Economic Security

Governor Proposes $600 Tax Refunds for Californians With Low Incomes Through the CalEITC

Millions of Californians are continuing to struggle to pay for basic expenses like food and rent amid the worst recession in generations. Asian, Black, and Latinx workers, women, and workers paid low wages were far more likely to lose their jobs and earnings this past year, and their financial situation has likely deteriorated recently as the nation began to lose jobs once again due to spiking COVID cases.

To help address the financial challenges facing families and individuals with the lowest incomes, the governor proposes providing one-time $600 tax refunds to tax filers who qualify for California’s Earned Income Tax Credit (CalEITC) — a refundable state tax credit available to families and individuals who earn less than $30,000 per year from work. Specifically, the administration’s “Golden State Stimulus” would provide $600 to the 3.8 million tax filers who received the CalEITC last year when they filed their taxes for tax year 2019. In addition, the state would provide $600 refunds to an estimated 250,000 families and individuals who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to file their taxes this year for tax year 2020 and qualify for the CalEITC. These tax filers became newly eligible for the CalEITC as part of the 2020-21 budget agreement. Families and individuals who qualify for the CalEITC in tax year 2020, but who did not qualify for the credit tax year 2019 (with the exception of ITIN filers) will not be eligible to receive these payments. The administration estimates that the $600 cash payments will cost $2.4 billion.

This proposal is part of the governor’s early action in January. If this proposal is approved within the administration’s anticipated timeframe, the governor envisions that the $600 payments would begin to be sent to CalEITC recipients as early as February 2021. Californians who file their taxes with Social Security Numbers, who make up the vast majority of those qualifying for these payments, will not have to do anything to receive the cash. The Franchise Tax Board (FTB) will automatically deposit the payments into these tax filers’ bank accounts based on the information they provided on their 2019 tax returns. For filers where this information wasn’t provided or is no longer accurate, the FTB will send filers checks. Californians who file their taxes using ITINs, on the other hand, will need to file their 2020 taxes in order to receive the cash payment.

Administration Includes Some Support for Undocumented Immigrants, But Misses An Opportunity to Extend Medi-Cal to Undocumented Seniors

California has the largest share of immigrant residents of any state and is home to an estimated 2 million to 3.1 million individuals who are undocumented. Half of all California workers are immigrants or children of immigrants. About 1 in 4 of these immigrant workers is employed in an industry highly affected by the COVID-19 economic shutdown. Among California’s undocumented workers, approximately 1 in 3 are employed in an industry highly affected by the COVID-19 economic shutdown, according to Budget Center estimates. Undocumented immigrants and their families face an especially high risk of financial crisis if they lose work due to COVID-19 because they are excluded from most support programs, including standard unemployment insurance as well as expanded COVID-19 federal relief. 

Prioritizing the urgent needs of undocumented immigrants and their families is an important opportunity for California’s policymakers to make our support systems more equitably inclusive, to make our state’s economy more resilient, and to lead in this time of crisis. The administration makes important strides to support Californians who are undocumented and have not recieved much if any support during the COVID-19 pandemic, but misses a key opportunity to improve health equity and make strides toward universal coverage during public health crises. 

Supports in the administration’s proposal include:

  • $600 tax refunds for Californians with low incomes through the CalEITC, including immigrants who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to file taxes. The administration’s “Golden State Stimulus” would provide $600 refunds to an estimated 250,000 families and individuals who use Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) to file their taxes this year for tax year 2020 and qualify for the CalEITC. These tax filers became newly eligible for the CalEITC as part of the 2020-21 budget agreement. The governor envisions that the $600 payments would begin to be sent to CalEITC recipients as early as February 2021.
  • Ongoing annual funding for immigration services. The budget proposal includes $75 million in ongoing General Fund for the unaccompanied undocumented minors and Immigration Services Funding programs. The Department of Social Services allocates funds through these two programs to nonprofit organizations who provide immigration services.
  • $11.4 million one-time for the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) emergency allotments. CFAP provides state-funded food assistance to “qualified” immigrants who are not eligible for CalFresh, California’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Under the governor’s proposal, the state would provide $11.4 million General Fund to maintain CFAP emergency allotments from July through December 2021, with these state funds offset by federal Coronavirus Relief Funds. These emergency allotments increase households’ food assistance benefits to the maximum benefit for their household size. However, the additional funding does not reflect a 15% increase in the maximum benefit as was approved for SNAP households in the recent federal economic relief bill. State policymakers should ensure that this 15% increase is also reflected for CFAP households, keeping with the longstanding practice of aligning CFAP benefits with CalFresh. In addition, state policymakers should consider expanding eligibility for CFAP to meet the needs of California’s immigrant population. The most recent available data from October 2020 shows that over 35,000 people participated in CFAP. Participation peaked in June, when nearly 40,000 people benefited from CFAP.
  • $5 million one-time General Fund for Rapid Response Program. This additional funding is to provide support to entities that provide critical assistance and services to immigrants during emergent situations. 
  • New requirement that all eligible high school seniors complete a California Dream Act Application. Local educational agencies would be required to ensure compliance beginning in the 2021-22 academic year. The California Student Aid Commission reported a 45% decrease in California Dream Act application completions in 2020 compared to 2019. 

Missed opportunities in the administration’s proposal include:

  • Failure to expand comprehensive Medi-Cal coverage to seniors regardless of immigration status — even in the midst of a deadly pandemic that is disproportionately affecting older adults. In recent years, California has extended full-scope Medi-Cal coverage to undocumented immigrants under age 26 who otherwise qualify for the program. One year ago, Governor Newsom proposed to expand this state policy to include undocumented adults age 65 or older, but withdrew this proposal in May and continues to exclude it from his 2021-22 spending plan. As a result, under the governor’s proposed budget, seniors who are undocumented would remain locked out of full-scope Medi-Cal coverage at a time when preventive health services and treatment for chronic health conditions are needed most, particularly given that older adults are most at risk of severe illness from COVID-19 and even death. By failing to expand Medi-Cal to undocumented seniors, the governor misses an opportunity to provide these older adults with an affordable, regular source of care, which could help to improve their health status as well as their chances of recovering from COVID-19. 
  • Not including new funding to expand student support services for immigrant students including undocumented students in California Community Colleges. The 2020-21 budget allocated $5.8 million for Dreamer Resource Liaisons and student support services, but no additional funding is proposed in the 2021-22 budget. 

The Administration’s January Proposal Makes Modest Adjustments to the CalWORKs Program, Anticipates an Increased Caseload

The California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) program provides modest cash assistance for low-income children while helping parents overcome barriers to employment and find jobs. Even before the COVID-19 crisis, CalWORKs primarily served children of color, who faced higher rates of economic insecurity than did white children. Now, with millions of California workers who have lost their jobs or seen reduced wages due to a long-term public health emergency and recession, CalWORKs is a particularly critical source of support.

In his January proposal, the governor proposes allocating $7.4 billion in federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds to support the CalWORKs program in 2021-22. Part of this spending reflects the administration’s anticipation of an increase in the average monthly number of CalWORKs families, due to the economic downturn. Workers of color — especially Black and Latinx women — have experienced the largest drops in employment due to the COVID-19 recession. With the loss of millions of jobs in California, it will be harder and will take longer for parents with work barriers to secure jobs that can cover the costs of living while also keeping their families safe and healthy. More parents will need to turn to CalWORKs for support, including some parents who turned to CalWORKs for support previously during the difficult job market and loss of housing stability in the Great Recession. 

Unlike most states, where parents are allowed to receive cash support for 60 months, California restricts parents in CalWORKs to only 48 months. Though this restriction, which began in 2011, was lifted in the 2020-21 budget, the restoration of the 60-month time limit will not take effect until at least May 2022 due to data system constraints. Until then, the January proposal provides $46.1 million one-time General Fund to ensure that CalWORKs clients who receive assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic can continue to do so without running down their 48-month clock.

Finally, the governor also proposes $50.1 million for a 1.5% grant increase, effective October 1, 2021. This increase would not be funded through the General Fund but instead through the Child Poverty and Family Supplemental Support subaccounts of the Local Revenue Fund.

Governor’s Proposal Offers Small Amount of Support for Subsidized Child Care, Does Not Include Plan for Federal COVID-Relief Funds

California’s subsidized child care and development system provides assistance for working parents with low and moderate incomes who are struggling to afford the cost of child care for their children. During this unprecedented health and economic crisis, many child care providers in California have stepped up to the challenge of providing early learning and care and distance learning support for families — particularly for children with parents who are essential workers. While the state and federal government have both provided emergency funding to support child care providers, total support falls far short of the estimated level necessary to sustain this critical system. Meanwhile, family budgets are even more strained due to lost jobs and wages, and without access to safe and affordable child care, many California families may not be able to return to work.

The governor’s proposed budget provides a small amount of funding to support child care providers and families. Specifically, the proposal:

  • Provides $55 million one-time General Fund for child care providers and families who are struggling due to the COVID-19 health and economic crisis. Additional details are not available.
  • Provides $44.3 million in Proposition 64 Cannabis Funds for roughly 4,500 spaces in the Alternative Payment Program. The governor proposes making $21.5 million available in the current fiscal year and $44 million ongoing.
  • Shifts $31.7 million and 185.7 staff positions from the California Department of Education to the Department of Social Services as part of the planned migration of child care programs that was part of the 2020-21 budget agreement. Administration of and funding for child care programs operated by the California Department of Education will also shift to the Department of Social Services on July 1, 2021.

Absent from the administration’s proposal is a plan to distribute an estimated $1 billion in federal funds — California’s expected share of the $10 billion in federal Child Care and Development Block Grant funds included in the most recent COVID relief package included in the Consolidated Appropriations Act. While the 2020-21 budget agreement stipulated how up to $300 million should be allocated if the state received additional federal funds, these items are also absent from the budget document released by the administration. The state has 60 days from the enactment of the federal relief package — which occurred on December 27, 2020 — to submit a plan for the use of these dollars.

Supporting child care in California is critical to helping providers survive the COVID-19 crisis, supporting parents who have no choice but to work outside the home, and aiding the state’s economic recovery.

Proposed Budget Lacks a State Increase for SSI/SSP Grants, but Includes New State Funding for Housing, Alzheimer’s, and Other Initiatives to Assist Seniors

Supplemental Security Income/State Supplementary Payment (SSI/SSP) grants help well over 1 million low-income seniors and people with disabilities to pay for housing and other necessities. Grants are funded with both federal (SSI) and state (SSP) dollars. State policymakers made deep cuts to the SSP portion of these grants to help close budget shortfalls that emerged after the onset of the Great Recession in 2007. Since then, state policymakers have provided only one increase to the state’s SSP portion of the grant — a 2.76% boost that took effect in January 2017, resulting in monthly SSP grant levels of $160.72 for individuals and $407.14 for couples, which continue to remain in effect.

Although the recently released Master Plan for Aging recognizes that SSI/SSP grants have “not kept up with poverty levels,” the governor proposes maintaining the SSP portion at the current inadequate levels into 2022. However, the federal government is expected to increase the SSI portion of these grants by 2.2% in January 2022. This increase would boost maximum SSI/SSP grants by $17 per month for individuals (to $971.72) and by $26 per month for couples (to $1,624.14).

While the governor misses an opportunity to boost state financial assistance for older adults and people with disabilities, he does propose new investments aimed at assisting these Californians in other ways. For example, the proposed budget:

  • Provides $250 million to preserve and expand housing for certain seniors with low incomes. The Department of Social Services would use this one-time funding to acquire and rehabilitate Adult Residential Facilities (ARFs) and Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFEs), with the goal of maintaining and increasing housing options for seniors who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. (This proposal is also discussed in the Homelessness section.)
  • Allocates $17 million to improve the state’s approach to Alzheimer’s disease. This one-time funding would support a public education campaign on brain health ($5 million); Alzheimer’s-related research ($4 million); new training and certification for caregivers ($4 million); expanded training for health care providers ($2 million); and grants to help communities become “dementia-friendly” ($2 million). Overall, this approach would emphasize people of color and women, who are disproportionately affected by Alzheimer’s, according to the budget summary.
  • Provides $7.5 million to expand one-stop information centers that serve seniors, people with disabilities, and people living with Alzheimer’s. These centers — known as Aging and Disability Resource Connections (ADRCs) — currently serve about one-third of the state and would be expanded statewide under the governor’s proposal. ADRCs provide “access to information and assistance with aging, disability, and Alzheimer’s, in multiple languages and with cultural competencies,” according to the governor’s budget summary. Funding for these centers would be subject to suspension on December 31, 2022, under the governor’s proposal. 
  • Includes $3 million to increase and diversify the geriatric medicine workforce. This one-time funding is intended to develop “a larger and more diverse pool of health care workers with experience in geriatric medicine,” according to the governor’s budget summary.

Proposed Budget Includes Proposals to Address Food Hardship

Food hardship has skyrocketed in California due to the COVID-19 health and economic crisis. This is particularly true for Black and Latinx Californians and other Californians of color who have been hit hard by the pandemic and are much more likely to not have enough food to eat. The governor’s proposed budget includes a number of food and nutrition proposals to help address food hardship in California. Specifically, the proposed budget:

  • Provides $11.4 million one-time for the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) emergency allotments. CFAP provides state-funded food assistance to “qualified” immigrants who are not eligible for CalFresh, California’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Under the governor’s proposal, the state would provide $11.4 million General Fund to maintain CFAP emergency allotments from July through December 2021, with these state funds offset by federal Coronavirus Relief Funds. These emergency allotments increase households’ food assistance benefits to the maximum benefit for their household size. However, the additional funding does not reflect a 15% increase in the maximum benefit as was approved for SNAP households in the recent federal economic relief bill. State policymakers should ensure that this 15% increase is also reflected for CFAP households, keeping with the longstanding practice of aligning CFAP benefits with CalFresh. In addition, state policymakers should consider expanding eligibility for CFAP to meet the needs of California’s immigrant population. (See also Immigration section.)
  • Extends increased funding for the Senior Nutrition Program, providing a total of $17.5 million in 2021-22. This includes catered meals as well as the Meals on Wheels program. Funding for this program was subject to suspension on December 31, 2021, but this potential suspension was delayed by one year, to December 31, 2022.
  • Provides an additional $22.3 million ongoing General Fund for the Supplemental Nutrition Benefit and Transitional Nutrition Benefit programs. As part of the 2018-19 budget agreement, state policymakers eliminated the “SSI cash-out,” allowing people enrolled in SSI/SSP to receive federal food benefits provided through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — called CalFresh in California. As a result of this policy change, certain households that were already receiving CalFresh benefits would have experienced a reduction in those benefits or become ineligible for CalFresh. The Supplemental Nutrition Benefit and Transitional Nutrition Benefit programs were created to offer state-funded benefits to these households to ensure that they did not lose critical assistance. The proposed budget would increase the average benefit amount for each program.
  • An additional $30 million one-time General Fund for food banks. Recognizing the vital role that Emergency Food Assistance Programs, food banks, tribes, and tribal organizations play in making sure Californians have enough to eat, the proposed budget includes an additional $30 million in one-time funding. Millions in California have recently turned to food pantries and food banks during the current recession, but this funding has not been identified for early action, despite the severity of the crisis. Additionally, this boost in one-time funding likely falls short of the levels necessary to adequately address the hunger crisis across the state. 
  • Provides $115 million to support college students’ basic needs, including access to food. The proposed budget includes $100 million one-time Proposition 98 funding to support CCC students experiencing housing and food insecurity in order to help mitigate the effects of the pandemic. The governor also proposes $15 million ongoing General Fund to address basic needs — such as hunger, homelessness, and financial insecurity — for California State University students through the Graduation Initiative 2025. (See also Community Colleges and California State University/University of California sections.)

Many in California are struggling to afford basic expenses while the COVID-19 pandemic rages unchecked. The governor’s proposed budget offers much-needed food assistance but none of these proposals are currently identified as “early action” items to be fast-tracked by state policymakers, despite the very clear need. 

Education

Governor’s Proposal Invests in Transitional Kindergarten

Transitional kindergarten is the first year of a two-year kindergarten program for children who turn five on or between September 2 and December 2 of the year they enter the program. Eligibility is based on age alone in public schools and is not dependent on family income. As part of the administration’s recently released Master Plan for Early Learning and Care, the 2021-22 budget proposal invests $500 million in one-time funding to make transitional kindergarten more accessible for families. This includes:

  • $250 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund for incentive grants for school districts to expand transitional kindergarten programs to younger children born after December 2. These funds would be distributed over a multi-year period.
  • $200 million one-time General Fund for school districts to construct or retrofit existing facilities in order to offer transitional kindergarten and full-day kindergarten programs. This is on top of $100 million included in the 2018-19 budget agreement for the same purpose, of which nearly all has been spent.
  • $50 million one-time Prop. 98 General Fund for training for transitional kindergarten and kindergarten teachers. Training instruction is to focus on a variety of issues meant to create more inclusive classrooms, such as implicit-bias training and supporting English Language Learners. 

Despite rescinding significant funding as a result of the pandemic, the governor’s proposed budget does not include funding for the California State Preschool Program — a program serving children from families with low and moderate incomes in community-based organizations and local education agencies. The State Preschool Program may be better positioned to provide services for working families with low incomes who need wraparound child care services beyond school hours and during summer months. 

Increased Revenues Boost the Minimum Funding Level for Schools and Community Colleges

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 proposed budget assumes a 2021-22 Prop. 98 guarantee of $85.8 billion for K-14 education, $14.9 billion above the 2020-21 funding level of $70.9 billion estimated in the 2020-21 budget agreement. The Prop. 98 guarantee tends to reflect changes in state General Fund revenues and estimates of 2019-20 and 2020-21 General Fund revenue in the proposed budget are higher than those in the 2020-21 budget agreement. The governor’s budget proposal assumes a 2020-21 Prop. 98 funding level of $82.8 billion, $11.9 billion above the level assumed in the 2020-21 budget agreement, and a $79.5 billion 2019-20 Prop. 98 funding level, $1.9 billion above the level assumed in the 2020-21 budget package. Last year’s budget agreement did not include a deposit into the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSSA) – the state budget reserve for K-12 schools and community colleges – due to projections for weak revenue from capital gains and a decline in the Prop. 98 funding guarantee. Revised projections in the governor’s proposed budget, however, would require a PSSSA deposit of $747 million in 2020-21 and an additional $2.2 billion in 2021-22, bringing the PSSSA total to $3 billion. 

To address the reduction in Prop. 98 funding for K-12 schools and community colleges that was projected last year, the 2020-21 budget agreement included a provision to supplement Prop. 98 funding beginning in 2021-22 by 1.5% of annual General Fund revenues. This new spending obligation was slated to continue until the total in supplemental payments reached $12.4 billion. Because of the significant increase in General Fund revenue projections in the governor’s proposed budget, his spending plan eliminates this ongoing obligation and instead includes a one-time supplemental payment of $2.3 billion for K-14 education in 2021-22. 

Governor Proposes to Repay Some Deferred Funding to Schools and Provide a Large Amount of One-Time Funding to Address Pandemic-Related Educational Disruptions

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 more than 6 million students in grades kindergarten through 12. The governor’s proposed budget repays school districts for a large amount of payments that were deferred in last year’s budget agreement, allocates significant one-time funding to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on students and to incentivize schools to provide in-person instruction, and increases ongoing funding for the state’s K-12 education funding formula – the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). Specifically, the governor’s proposed budget:

  • Provides $7.3 billion to repay deferred payments to K-12 school districts. The 2020-21 budget agreement deferred $11.0 billion in LCFF payments for K-12 school districts until 2021-22. The payment deferrals allowed the state to authorize a level of spending by K-12 schools that the state could not afford in 2020-21, providing the state with one year of savings without requiring a reduction in K-12 education spending. While repaying a large amount of the deferrals in 2021-22, the governor’s proposed budget would continue to defer $3.7 billion in LCFF payments until 2022-23. 
  • Provides $4.6 billion in one-time funding for expanded learning time and academic intervention grants. To address educational disruptions due to the pandemic, the budget proposes early action before June and targets these dollars for interventions focused on English learners, students from low-income families, and foster and homeless youth, such as an extended school year or summer school. 
  • Allocates $2 billion in one-time funding for In-Person Instruction Grants. These per pupil grants would be available beginning in February 2021 to school districts, COEs, and classroom-based charter schools that fulfill a series of requirements that include:
    • submitting a COVID-19 School Safety Plan to their COE, or the California Department of Education for single-district counties; 
    • providing an option for in-person instruction by no later than March 15, 2021 for transitional kindergarten through 6th grade; and 
    • providing the option for in-person instruction to at least students with disabilities, foster youth, homeless youth, and students who are not able to participate in online instruction.

Schools not able to provide in-person instruction due to high COVID-19 case rates in their county or local health jurisdiction would be eligible for full grant amounts if they fulfill grant requirements and the seven-day adjusted average COVID case rates in their county or local health jurisdiction falls below 28 cases per 100,000 people per day. In-Person Instruction Grants would be available for use until December 31, 2021 and could be used for any purpose consistent with providing in-person instruction such as teacher salaries, COVID-19 testing, or personal protective equipment.

  • Increases LCFF funding by $2 billion. 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 governor’s proposal would provide a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 3.84% in 2021-22, which includes making up for last year’s budget agreement not providing a 1.5% COLA for the LCFF in 2020-21.
  • Provides more than $300 million in one-time funds for educator professional development. The governor’s proposal would fund several programs including $250 million for the Educator Effectiveness Block Grant, $50 million to create statewide resources and provide professional development on social-emotional learning and trauma-informed practices, and $8.3 million for the California Early Math Initiative to provide teacher professional development in mathematics teaching strategies. 
  • Provides $264.9 million in one-time funds for community schools. Community schools provide integrated educational, health, and mental health services to students. The governor’s budget proposes to use community school grants for school districts to develop new and expand existing networks of community schools with priority given for schools in high-poverty communities. 
  • Provides $225 million in one-time funds to improve the teacher pipeline. The governor’s proposal would increase funding by $100 million for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program, a grant program for students enrolled in teacher preparation programs who commit to teach in “high-need” subjects, including bilingual education, STEM, and special education (also see Student Financial Aid section); $100 million for the Teacher Residency Program, a competitive grant program established in 2018 to recruit and prepare special education, science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and bilingual education teachers to teach in high-need communities; and $25 million for the California Classified School Employees Credentialing Program, which provides grants to K-12 school districts to recruit school employees to become classroom teachers.
  • Provides $85.7 million to fund COLAs for non-LCFF programs. The governor’s proposed budget funds a 1.5% COLA for several categorical programs that remain outside of the LCFF, including special education, child nutrition, and American Indian Education Centers.

The Budget Proposal Expands Supports for Low-Income Community College Students Hardest Hit by the Effects of the Pandemic

A portion of Proposition 98 funding provides support for California Community Colleges (CCCs), the largest postsecondary education system in the country. CCCs help prepare nearly 2.1 million students to transfer to four-year institutions or to obtain training and employment skills. In 2017-18, about 126,000 CCC students transferred to a four-year postsecondary institution — approximately 32,000 of those were first-generation students — and in 2018-19, more than 84,000 students earned an associate’s degree. 

The 2021-22 budget proposal includes emergency financial support for students most affected by the pandemic, invests in targeted efforts to engage and retain students, increases access and quality of remote learning, and makes investments in workforce development. Specifically, the proposed spending plan:

  • Includes approximately $1.1 billion to reduce deferred payments to CCCs. To avoid spending cuts, the 2020-21 budget agreement deferred $1.5 billion in payments to CCCs until 2021-22. The budget proposal includes repayment of a portion of these deferrals, but still defers approximately $326.5 million from 2021-22 to 2022-23.
  • Proposes $250 million in one-time funding to expand financial assistance for students experiencing hardship due to the pandemic. The budget proposes early action before June to provide $100 million in funding for emergency financial support for full-time, low-income students who lost full-time employment. The budget proposal also includes $150 million for this same purpose for 2021-22, after June.
  • Includes an increase of $111.1 million for a 1.5% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for apportionments. 
  • Provides $100 million in one-time funding to support student basic needs. The proposed budget includes support for CCC students experiencing housing and food insecurity in order to help mitigate the effects of the pandemic. 
  • Includes $40.6 million in ongoing funding to bolster remote learning and support student mental health. An increase of $30 million Prop. 98 would support students’ basic technology needs and make progress in closing the digital divide by helping students acquire devices and high-speed internet and also increase student access to mental health resources. The proposed budget also includes $10.6 million to continue improving distance learning, online access to academic support, counseling, and mental health services. 
  • Includes $20 million in one-time funds to address a decline in student enrollment as a result of the pandemic and increase retention rates. From fall 2019 to fall 2020, student enrollment at CCCs has dropped by roughly 8%. As part of the early action package, the proposed investment would support re-enrollment, retention, and recruitment.  
  • Includes $20 million in one-time funding to expand work-based learning programs at CCCs. This investment would expand work-based learning programs, models, and curriculum. 
  • Provides $15 million in ongoing funds to expand the California Apprenticeship Initiative. The apprenticeship program supports the expansion of apprenticeship opportunities for training and development in growing and priority industries. 

Absent from the administration’s proposal is additional funding to expand student support services for immigrant students, including undocumented students in CCCs. CCCs provide support through Dreamer Resource Liaisons and legal services for immigrant students, faculty, and staff. Changes in federal immigration policies have increased the need for services and greater investment is necessary to advance economic justice for immigrant students.

The January Proposal Increases Funding for the CSUs and UCs, Includes Some Additional Support to Address Equity

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 roughly 486,000 students on 23 campuses, and the UC provides undergraduate, graduate, and professional education to about 285,000 students on 10 campuses.

For the CSU, the administration proposes $144.5 million in ongoing General Fund, including:

  • $111.5 million to support a three percent increase in base resources for operational costs.
  • $15 million to address basic needs (such as hunger, homelessness, and financial insecurity) for students through the Graduation Initiative 2025.
  • $15 million to address inequities in digital connectivity and for mental health support.
  • Over $3 million for other purposes such as an online learning platform, expansion at CSU Stanislaus, Stockton, and broadband access.

The governor also proposes one-time spending of $225 million General Fund, including $30 million for emergency grants to low-income students and students working full-time. The remainder would go to support deferred maintenance, faculty development, and the Computing Talent Initiative at CSU Monterey Bay.

For the UC, the administration proposes $136 million in ongoing General Fund, including:

  •  $103.9 million to support a three percent increase in base resources for operational costs.
  •  $15 million to address inequities in digital connectivity and improve access to mental health resources.
  •  $12.9 million for UC Programs in Medical Education, including an expansion to focus on American Indian communities. (See also Other Proposals section.)

The governor also proposes one-time spending of $225 million General Fund, including $15 million for emergency grants for low-income students and those working full-time. The remainder would support deferred maintenance, professional development for K-12 teachers to address ethnic studies and learning loss mitigation, and other purposes.

The administration would provide these funds with the expectation that both the CSU and the UC would maintain current tuition and fee levels. Both institutions would also be expected to take action to reduce equity gaps by 2025 and to create pathways to guarantee admission to first-time freshmen who have completed an Associate Degree for Transfer from the California Community Colleges.

Administration Provides Additional Emergency Financial Assistance Grants and Funds Golden State Teacher Grant Program

Cal Grants are the foundation of California’s financial aid program for low- and middle-income students pursuing higher education in the state. Cal Grants provide aid for tuition and living expenses that do not have to be paid back. Ensuring Californians have access and the resources to attend and thrive in the state’s higher education institutions broadens opportunities for individuals and families as well as strengthens our state’s workforce to drive long-term economic growth. Many students already confront significant hardships to afford tuition and living expenses, including student-parents, current and former foster youth, undocumented students, and those from families with low incomes. These students now face added layers of stress and financial insecurity due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to address these challenges and continue to support California’s higher education students, the proposed 2021-22 budget includes:

  • $295 million one-time General Fund for emergency student financial assistance grants. This includes $250 million for California’s Community Colleges, $30 million for the California State University, and $15 million for the University of California. The additional student grants will target full-time, low-income students who were previously working full-time and who demonstrate a financial need. The governor proposes $100 million for California’s Community Colleges to be included in an early action package this spring.
  • $100 million one-time General Fund for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program. The program is intended to provide grants of $20,000 for teachers committed to teaching for four years in “high-need” subjects — including bilingual education, STEM, and special education — and in schools that have a high percentage of teachers with “emergency-type permits.” 
  • $35 million ongoing General Fund to add 9,000 Competitive Cal Grant awards. Competitive Cal Grants support students who attend college more than a year after high school graduation and meet certain income and GPA requirements. The additional funding will expand the number of available grants to 50,000, up from the current level of 41,000.
  • $20 million ongoing General Fund for former and current foster youth access award. Eligible new or renewal Cal Grant A and B students will receive awards up to $6,000 and Cal Grant C students will receive $4,000.
  • A new requirement that all high school seniors complete a FAFSA or California Dream Act Application. Local education agencies would be required to ensure compliance beginning in the 2021-22 academic year. The California Student Aid Commission reported that there was a 10% decrease in FAFSA and 45% decrease in California Dream Act application completions in 2020 compared to 2019.

Justice System

Proposed Budget Reports That California Is on Track to Spend More Than $1 Billion Related to COVID-19 in State Prisons, as the Virus Continues to Spread

More than 95,400 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. More than two-thirds of state prisoners are Black or Latinx individuals — a racial disparity that reflects implicit bias in the justice system, structural disadvantages faced by these communities, and other factors. Among all incarcerated adults, most — 90,639 — are housed in state prisons designed to hold fewer than 85,100 people. This level of overcrowding is equal to 106.5% 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. (In other words, although state prisons remain overcrowded, the state is complying with the court order.) In addition, California houses over 4,800 people in facilities that are not subject to the court-ordered cap, including fire camps, in-state “contract beds,” and community-based facilities that provide rehabilitative services. The sizable drop in incarceration has resulted both from 1) a series of reforms to the justice system enacted during the 2010s and 2) changes adopted in 2020 to further reduce prison overcrowding in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as suspending intakes from county jails and implementing early releases.

The proposed budget:

  • Projects the state is on track to spend $1.1 billion on COVID-19 activities in state prisons from the onset of the pandemic to the end of the current fiscal year (June 30, 2021). Moreover, the governor proposes to spend an additional $281.3 million on COVID-19 activities in prison during the upcoming 2021-22 fiscal year.
  • Confirms that COVID-19 continues to spread among incarcerated adults and prison staff. In December 2020, active cases among incarcerated adults exceeded 9,000, and active cases among staff surpassed 2,600, with every state prison having had active cases at some point. Furthermore, 103 incarcerated adults at 17 prisons had died of COVID-19 as of mid-December.
  • Reports that the number of adults incarcerated at the state level is substantially lower than expected largely due to state actions taken in response to COVID-19. The state projected an average daily prison population of 122,536 when the 2020-21 budget was adopted last June. The governor now estimates an average daily population of 97,950 in 2020-21 — 20% below the original estimate. Moreover, the state projects the prison population will drop by an additional 2,626 between 2020-21 and 2021-22. These significant declines are largely due to actions the state has taken to reduce overcrowding and mitigate the spread of the virus among incarcerated adults. These actions include suspending intakes from county jails and implementing early releases.
  • Continues to plan for the closure of two state prisons over the next couple of years. The administration plans to close the Deuel Vocational Institution by September 2021, for General Fund savings of $113.5 million in 2021-22, rising to $150.6 million in 2022-23. A second state-operated prison is planned for closure in 2022-23, although the specific institution that will be closed has not been announced.
  • Includes $23.2 million in 2020-21 for technology needed to increase incarcerated adults’ access to remote-learning opportunities. This proposal includes the purchase of about 38,000 laptop computers for adults enrolled in community college courses and other academic programs. It also includes the expansion of network bandwidth and the creation of a “secure online academic portal” that would allow students to complete their educational programs remotely. Maintaining these initiatives would cost $18 million per year beginning in 2022-23, according to the governor’s budget summary.

Proposed Budget Increases Funding for County Probation Departments and Continues Fines and Fees Assistance for Californians With Low Incomes

All California counties play a key role in the state’s local correctional system, including by operating jails and supervising adults and juveniles on probation. While COVID-19 health concerns pushed most counties to continue temporarily lower bail schedules and reduce the number of people held in custody, county jails still house roughly 58,000 adults on a given day. Counties’ role in corrections was transformed by the state-to-county “realignment” that took effect in 2011, following a US Supreme Court order that required the state to reduce its prison population. Under realignment, counties are responsible for managing certain adults who had traditionally been housed in state prisons and supervised by state parole officers upon their release. Recently, juvenile justice realignment also transferred responsibility for youth who are wards of the state to counties. As of June 30, 2021, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Division of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) will no longer house juveniles, with limited exceptions, and transfer care for these youths to counties.

In this budget, the administration acknowledged the increasing responsibility counties are undertaking due to their key role in rehabilitation and adult and juvenile realignment. To this end, the proposed budget provides:

  • $122.9 million ongoing General Fund to county probation departments to support efforts to maintain or reduce current probation revocation rates due to COVID-19 changes to statewide probation policy.
  • $50 million one-time General Fund in 2020-21 for county probation departments to enhance a broad range of services to quickly and effectively prevent youth and adults from entering or reentering the criminal justice system. The governor proposes early legislative action for this funding in 2021.  
  • $46.5 million General Fund in 2021-22, $122.9 million in 2022-2023, $195.9 million in 2023-24, and $212.7 million in ongoing in 2024-25 for county probation departments to take responsibility for youth who will be under their jurisdiction once the DJJ closes. 
  • $19.5 million one-time General Fund in 2021-22 for county probation departments for additional adults on Post-Release Community Supervision due to a temporary increase in the daily population.

The local correctional system is also accompanied by California’s 58 county-based trial courts that supplement the foundation of the state’s judicial branch – ruling on both civil and criminal cases. The governor’s proposal continues ongoing efforts to reduce criminal fines and fees for Californians with low incomes through allocating $12.3 million General Fund in 2021-22, increasing to $58.4 million ongoing General Fund by 2024-25. These proposed funds are allocated to expand a pilot program currently administered by the Judicial Council in six courts to county courts statewide. This would allow Californians with qualifying incomes to reduce their penalties by 50% or more and make payments over time for certain traffic and non-traffic related fines and fees. 

Other Proposals

Proposed Budget Includes New Investments in Job Creation, Small Business Relief, and Workforce Development

The governor’s budget contains a series of proposals intended to create and retain jobs, assist small businesses struggling due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and provide training and industry linkages for those entering or re-entering the workforce. 

The governor proposes $777.5 million for a “California Jobs” Initiative, which includes:

  • $430 million for the California Competes Program, a competitive tax credit program created in 2014 for businesses that commit to creating or retaining jobs in California. The governor proposes increasing the tax credit program by $90 million in both 2020-21 and 2021-22. Currently, total tax credit awards are capped at $180 million per year. Additionally, the proposal includes $250 million in one-time General Fund to create a competitive grant program for businesses meeting specific investment or job creation criteria. Of the $250 million proposed, $50 million would be reserved for businesses located in “high-need, high-opportunity” areas. The governor requests the Legislature include these funds in an early action package prior to the June budget.
  • $100 million for the Main Street Small Business Tax Credit in 2021-22, a credit against state income or sales taxes for small businesses impacted by COVID-19 to support the hiring and rehiring of employees. This is in addition to the $100 million in tax credits authorized in September 2020.
  • $100 million for a one-time expansion of the California Alternative Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority (CAEATFA) sales tax exclusion. This program allows businesses to apply for a sales tax exclusion for the purchase of manufacturing equipment relating to alternative energy and advanced transportation, with the goal of expanding the state’s economy and advancing the state’s climate goals. Under existing law, the sales tax exclusion program is capped at $100 million annually.
  • $100 million one-time General Fund for the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank). Of this amount, $50 million would be for small business loan guarantees, and $50 million would more broadly support IBank’s programs, with an emphasis on those that benefit underserved businesses.
  • $35 million one-time General Fund for a California Dream Fund to provide startup grants of up to $10,000 for entrepreneurs to promote new small business creation, focusing on groups that have historically faced barriers to accessing capital such as people of color, women, and immigrants. The governor requests this funding be included in an early action package before the June budget.
  • $12.5 million for the California Rebuilding Fund, a public-private partnership to provide loans to the smallest businesses. The 2020 Budget Act seeded the fund with $25 million, and the governor announced the additional $12.5 million investment in November. The administration expects that the Fund will provide $125 million in capital for small businesses with a combination of public, private, and philanthropic funds.

The proposed budget includes $575 million in additional funds for the State’s Small Business COVID-19 Relief Grant Program, which provides grants of up to $25,000 for small businesses and nonprofit organizations that have been impacted by COVID-19, with priority given to regions and industries particularly hard-hit as well as disadvantaged communities and “underserved small business groups.” Of this amount, $25 million will be for grants to small cultural institutions such as museums and art galleries that have been impacted by COVID-19. The $575 million proposal is in addition to the $500 million in initial funding for the program announced by the governor in November. The governor is proposing the Legislature include the additional investment in an early action package in January. 

The governor proposes $352.9 million to support workforce development strategies, including:

  • $250 million one-time General Fund to support forthcoming proposals to strengthen linkages between institutions of higher education and employers.
  • $35 million Proposition 98 General Fund to support apprenticeship and work-based learning programs in community colleges. (See also section on Community Colleges)
  • $20 million one-time General fund for science and innovation institutes on University of California campuses, including student stipends and linkages with industry partners. (See also section on CSU and UC.)
  • $12.9 million ongoing General Fund for UC Programs in Medical Education (PRIME), including the establishment of a new program focused on American Indian communities. (See also section on CSU and UC.)
  • $25 million one-time General fund for the California Workforce Development Board to expand the High Roads Training Program to create new apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships in the fields of construction, forestry and agriculture, health care, trade and logistics, and information technology. The governor requests the legislature include this item in an early action package before the June budget.
  • $10 million one-time General Fund for the Computing Talent Initiative at California State University, Monterey Bay to support underrepresented computer science students in developing skills and connecting with industry professionals. (See also section on CSU and UC.)

Finally, the budget proposal includes $70.6 million in one-time fee waivers for individuals and small businesses in service industries heavily affected by shutdowns, such as restaurants, bars, and salons. The governor requests that these waivers be included in an early action package in January.

Some of the governor’s proposals are appropriately targeted to small businesses and workers that have been the hardest hit by the COVID-19 recession. However, some of the proposed funds will likely go to businesses that do not need assistance. For instance, the California Competes tax credit program and the CAEATFA sales tax exclusion are available to businesses of any size and have uncertain effects on the state’s economy, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office has previously recommended eliminating them both. The funds set aside for these purposes could instead be used to directly support Californians most affected by the pandemic and recession.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

As one of the most complicated measures on the November 2020 state ballot, Proposition 19 would make significant changes to California’s residential property tax system. The proposition would expand a property tax loophole for older, mostly wealthier homeowners, while covering the cost by narrowing another special tax rule for inherited properties – and would then require state and local governments to track how much their tax revenues change as a result, requiring new administrative infrastructure. Altogether Prop. 19 would likely result in increased state and local revenues on net – but not for all counties – while most of the newly available state dollars would be restricted to a new special fund limited to use for supporting fire response. Prop. 19 includes some elements that policymakers could consider as part of more comprehensive tax reform, but its central proposal to expand tax breaks for older, mostly white, mostly economically advantaged homeowners would make California’s tax system less equitable. The complicated proposal would also do little or nothing to help the Californians most severely affected by the state’s housing affordability crisis, including renters, families with low incomes, and most Black and Latinx residents. This proposition was initiated by the California Association of Realtors and modified in negotiations with the Legislature.

Prop. 19 Expands Tax Breaks for Older, Mostly White Homeowners Who Tend to Be Economically Secure Already, Reducing the Equity of California’s Tax System

California already has special rules that allow homeowners who are age 55 or older or who are severely disabled to avoid paying higher property taxes if they sell their home and move to a new home under certain circumstances – and Prop. 19 would expand the special tax breaks for these same homeowners. About 4 million homeowners age 55 or older would be eligible to benefit from these new property tax breaks under Prop. 19, as well as a much smaller number of younger homeowners with disabilities, according to Budget Center analysis. Similar existing special rules apply to individuals whose homes have been damaged or destroyed by fire or other natural disasters, and these tax breaks would also be expanded, though homeowners affected by disasters who are not also eligible due to age or disability make up a tiny share – well under 1% – of the total number of homeowners eligible to benefit from Prop. 19, according to Budget Center analysis.

Generally, the homeowners who would be eligible to benefit from these new special property tax breaks under Proposition 19:

  • have higher incomes and are more economically secure than California household heads overall; 
  • have much higher incomes and are much less likely to be living in poverty than similarly-aged older renter household heads;
  • are long-term homeowners, many with access to substantial home equity, with more than half owning homes worth a half-million dollars or more, according to Budget Center analysis.

By expanding tax breaks for this economically advantaged group, Prop. 19 would make California’s tax system less progressive and more inequitable.

California Proposition 19 Eligible Homeowners Are Much Less Likely to Live in Poverty Than Older Renters of Californians Overall

Prop. 19-eligible homeowners are also substantially more likely to be white and much less likely to be Latinx or Black than the heads of California households overall, according to Budget Center analyses. Housing policy and tax policy have historically benefited white households most, including through policies with explicitly racist design and implementation that have blocked Black and brown Californians from homeownership opportunities. By directing additional tax benefits largely to white homeowners, Prop. 19 reinforces racial inequity within California’s tax system.

More Than 6 in 10 Proposition 18 Eligible Homeowners Are White, Versus Less Than Half of California Household Heads Overall

Prop. 19 Would Attempt to Pay for Expanding One Property Tax Break By Limiting Another – California’s Property Tax Inheritance Loophole

Prop. 19 would narrow California’s property tax inheritance loophole, which offers Californians who inherit certain properties a significant tax break by allowing them to pay property taxes based on the property’s value when it was originally purchased rather than its value upon inheritance. As outlined in an analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), this loophole is costly, inequitable, and may exacerbate the state’s housing crisis. And since wealthy, white individuals are more likely to receive inheritances, this loophole likely exacerbates the racial wealth gap.

Prop. 19 would narrow California’s inheritance loophole by 1) requiring the inherited property be used as the child’s primary residence or as a family farm to qualify for the tax break and 2) limiting the tax savings for properties where the market value is at least $1 million higher than the taxable value prior to the transfer. These changes would lessen the inequities in California’s current property tax system and raise property tax revenue to support local services, but a more sound and less complicated policy would be to limit the inheritance loophole without linking it to the expansion of another inequitable tax break.

Prop. 19 Would Result in a Net Increase in Local and State Tax Revenues, While Narrowly Restricting Most State Revenue Gains to Use for Fire Response

The property tax changes proposed in Prop. 19 would likely raise local property tax revenues to support community services, but these gains are limited by the expansion of the special rules for certain homeowners and would vary significantly by county and year. Some counties may lose revenue in some years, though the measure would require that local agencies be at least partially reimbursed for the losses. In some years, most school districts would see no net gains in funding, as state funding for education would decrease to offset the property tax revenue gains.

The measure is also expected to result in some increased income tax revenue to the state due to increased home sales, as well as state budget savings due to a reduction in the state’s share of education funding under the Proposition 98 minimum funding guarantee. The majority of this additional revenue and savings – 75% of the net gains – would be earmarked for state and local fire suppression activities. While the state clearly has an urgent need for fire response resources, restricting funds to specific purposes compromises the state’s flexibility and ability to respond to changing circumstances.

Prop. 19’s Complex Scheme of Tax Break Tradeoffs and Funding Restrictions Misses the Mark for Equitable and Effective Public Policy

As California seeks to make equitable policy choices and advance budget decisions for people and their communities, the state cannot achieve those goals with complex schemes that needlessly combine efforts to increase state and local revenues – to address critical community needs – with substantial tax breaks for mostly wealthier California homeowners. A more just approach to reforming California’s tax system would keep the elements of Prop. 19 that increase revenues equitably without linking this change to expanded benefits for individuals who mostly have little need for additional tax cuts. A more effective policy design would also allow more flexible use of increased revenues – which could allow the opportunity to use funds to address the needs of Californians most affected by the state’s housing affordability crisis, such as those who rent their homes, those with lower incomes, and Black and brown Californians who have been blocked from homeownership opportunities and hit hardest by unaffordable housing costs. Overall, Prop. 19’s tax break giveaways and complexity limit its potential to make the state’s tax system more equitable and to effectively address Californians’ most urgent needs.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!

Millions of Californians are struggling to pay for basic necessities like housing and food amid the worst recession in recent history. California’s unemployment remains extremely high, particularly for Black and brown Californians. What’s more, the financial situation for many people has deteriorated as Congress has failed to extend additional federal unemployment benefits or provide any new economic relief that would significantly help children, families, and individuals who have lost income and cannot safely return to work. This report shows how California’s workers are faring six months into the COVID-19 recession and highlights the urgent need for federal and state policymakers to extend support to people and do more to respond to the economic crisis that is exacerbating health and financial disparities for Californians, especially Black and brown Californians.

California’s Unemployment Remains High, Know the numbers:

California is still down more jobs than the state lost during the Great Recession.

California is still down more jobs than the state lost during the Great Recession. As of August, California was still down by 1.7 million jobs because of the COVID-19 crisis. This is about 400,000 more jobs than the state lost due to the Great Recession, which began in 2007. Earlier this year, California lost a total of 2.6 million jobs – twice the number lost due to the Great Recession.


As of August, California had gained back just 34% of the 2.6 million jobs the state lost in March and April

About two-thirds of the jobs California lost have not returned. As of August, California had gained back just 34% of the 2.6 million jobs the state lost this past spring. Most of these gains (21%) occurred in June as the state loosened restrictions on businesses that were put into place to slow the spread of COVID-19. In July and August, however, job gains slowed dramatically as California reimposed business restrictions to respond to spiking virus cases. In fact, a sizable share of jobs added in August were temporary positions related to the decennial US Census that will end when the Census count wraps up this fall. In other words, without these temporary jobs, August gains would have been much weaker.


All major private-sector industries in California still have fewer jobs than before the COVID-19 recession began

All major private-sector industries in California still have fewer jobs than before the COVID-19 recession began. The leisure and hospitality industry, which includes jobs at restaurants, hotels, and entertainment venues, remains the hardest hit industry. As of August, this industry was still down 657,000 jobs, meaning that about two-thirds of the 982,000 jobs the industry lost between February and April were still gone. In fact, this industry, together with the “other” services industry, which includes face-to-face personal care jobs, began to lay workers off again in August. This likely reflects the fact that California reimposed restrictions affecting many businesses in these industries in early July amid rising COVID-19 cases.


Unemployment remains higher for Californians of color and Black Californians have yet to see a notable decline

Unemployment remains higher for Californians of color and Black Californians have yet to see a notable decline. At the peak of the COVID-19 recession, the unemployment rate reached 20% or more for Asian, Black, Latinx and other Californians of color – several percentage points higher than the rate for white Californians. Job gains through August reduced unemployment for some groups, but disparities between Californians of color and white Californians persist. Also of great concern, Black Californians have yet to see any significant net job gains. Their unemployment rate has remained essentially unchanged since peaking this summer, possibly reflecting the persistent discrimination Black workers face in the workplace.

The unemployment rates presented in this report were adjusted to account for people the Bureau of Labor Statistics suspects were misclassified as employed but absent from work who actually were unemployed. For more information, see the technical note at the end of this report.


Unemployment rose higher for women in California and remains extremely high

Unemployment rose higher for women in California and remains extremely high. The unemployment rate for women increased by 20 percentage points between February and April, reaching 25%, while men’s unemployment rate rose by 15 percentage points, peaking at 20%. This means that at the worst point of the recession, 1 in 4 women were out of work, compared to 1 in 5 men. By August, unemployment rates had fallen to 14% for women and 12% for men, but remained extremely high, at more than twice their pre-recession rates.


Unemployment rose higher for immigrants in California and remains extremely high

Unemployment rose higher for immigrants in California and remains extremely high. The unemployment rate for immigrants increased by 21 percentage points between February and April, peaking at 25%, while non-immigrant’s unemployment rate rose by 16 percentage points, reaching 21%. In other words, 1 in 4 immigrants were out of work at the worst point of the recession, compared to just over 1 in 5 non-immigrants. By August, the unemployment rate had fallen to 13% for both groups, but remained extremely high, at around three times their pre-recession rate.


Federal and State Policymakers Need to Do More to Respond to the COVID-19 Recession

Six months into the COVID-19 recession, California is still down 1.7 million jobs and California’s workers continue to face extremely high unemployment rates. These facts point to the urgent need for federal and state policymakers to do more to address both the public health and economic crisis. Failing to do so will pile onto the hits to Black and brown Californians and be yet another policy choice that exacerbates longstanding racial, ethnic, and gender disparities. Lawmakers can alleviate the economic pain millions of Californians are feeling and prevent those pains from hardening into deep scars with a combination of policies at the federal and state level.

Federal policymakers should provide more economic relief including:

  • Reinstating the $600-per-week additional unemployment benefit that expired in late July so that out-of-work Californians can continue to pay the rent and buy groceries for their families.
  • Providing rental assistance to people at risk of eviction because losing housing threatens families’ economic security and could put more people at risk of contracting COVID-19.
  • Increasing food assistance benefits so that Californians who are struggling to buy enough food during the pandemic and recession do not go hungry.
  • Providing more aid to state and local governments in order to avoid large reductions in education, health, and other critical services and to prevent more layoffs.
  • Assisting child care providers who are maintaining safe places for children to learn and grow during the pandemic and are essential to working parents and those seeking to return to the workforce.

California policymakers should continue to fill in where federal economic relief policies fall short. One of the most glaring shortcomings of federal policymakers’ response to the COVID-19 recession is that economic relief measures excluded undocumented immigrants and their families, diminishing the economic security of millions of Californians. State leaders could help to reduce this harm by:

  • Providing emergency food assistance to undocumented Californians and their families, who are likely at high risk of being unable to afford enough food during the pandemic.
  • Providing financial assistance to help undocumented workers who lose their jobs and are shut out of state and federal unemployment insurance benefits.
  • Working toward extending eligibility for comprehensive Medi-Cal health coverage to all income-eligible adults who are excluded from such coverage due to their immigration status. 

Technical note

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) believes that during the COVID-19 recession a large number of workers who reported being employed but absent from work were in fact on temporary layoff and should have been counted as unemployed. Each month since March, the BLS has estimated how many workers may have been misclassified in this way and has reported what the national unemployment rate would have been had these workers been counted as unemployed. This analysis follows the BLS methodology for identifying potentially misclassified workers, which is described here, and adds these workers to the number of unemployed in order to calculate adjusted unemployment rates. These rates should be more accurate than rates calculated with no adjustments.

Nevertheless, these adjusted unemployment rates may still understate unemployment for a different reason. To be counted as unemployed, workers must have made specific efforts to find employment in the past four weeks. If they did not, then they are counted as not in the labor force even if they want to work. This means that they are not included in the unemployment rate. However, it’s likely that many workers who lost their jobs during the COVID-19 recession did not search for work even if they wanted a job, particularly at the beginning of the recession when state-mandated business closures meant that there were far fewer jobs available. Moreover, California temporarily waived the requirement that unemployed workers search for jobs each week in order to receive unemployment benefits, reducing the incentive for workers to search for new jobs. Some economists have published adjusted unemployment rates that are likely more accurate because they reclassify some individuals who recently dropped out of the labor force as unemployed. This analysis, however, does not attempt to correct for this problem, which means that actual unemployment rates for Californians may be higher than what is presented in this report.

Stay in the know.

Join our email list!