AB 2158 recognizes outdoor learning as an effective, developmentally appropriate instructional method and directs the California Department of Education to produce statewide guidance on its use. The guidance must address best practices, safety, equity, site-improvement models, and partnership strategies, and the bill authorizes (subject to appropriation) aligned professional learning for educators.
The bill also establishes a Statewide Outdoor Learning Pilot Program: the Superintendent will award grants to six pilot sites across northern, central, and southern California to test models, build evidence, and prioritize communities historically underserved or burdened by environmental harms. The pilot requires partnership between local educational agencies and community outdoor providers, permits contracting with an intermediary and evaluators, and culminates in a final public report; the program is appropriation-dependent and sunsets in 2032.
At a Glance
What It Does
Recognizes outdoor learning as an endorsed instructional method, requires the Superintendent to publish statewide guidance by July 1, 2028, and establishes a three-year pilot (six grantees) to demonstrate outcomes and inform statewide scaling. The Superintendent may contract with an intermediary and select a statewide evaluator; the pilot runs only if the Legislature funds it.
Who It Affects
K–12 local educational agencies (districts, county offices, charter schools), classroom educators, community-based outdoor learning providers, and state education staff who would develop guidance, award grants, and manage evaluation. Tribal partners and parks agencies are named consultation targets.
Why It Matters
This bill converts policy preference for environmental literacy into actionable state guidance and a funded demonstration, explicitly targeting equity gaps in access to outdoor instruction and creating a small evidence base to guide future investment decisions.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 2158 begins by formally recognizing the instructional value of outdoor learning and linking it to California’s prior commitment to environmental literacy. It sets out clear definitions—environmental literacy (as tied to Public Resources Code standards), local educational agency, and a broad definition of outdoor learning that includes schoolyards, parks, coastal and watershed areas, and community spaces—so stakeholders share a baseline understanding of the practice the state is seeking to expand.
The bill requires the State Superintendent of Public Instruction to develop and publish statewide guidance on outdoor learning by July 1, 2028. That guidance must cover five defined areas: standards-aligned delivery in outdoor settings; safety and risk management; strategies for equitable access (with explicit reference to unduplicated pupils, pupils with disabilities, and English learners); models for enhancing school-site outdoor environments; and partnership strategies with community-based organizations, tribes, and park agencies.
The Superintendent must consult a range of practitioners and experts in developing the guidance, and may, if the Legislature provides funding, offer professional learning tied to that guidance.Separately, AB 2158 creates a Statewide Outdoor Learning Pilot Program that operates for three years once the Legislature appropriates funds. The Department will award grants to six pilot sites chosen to represent northern, central, and southern California and a diversity of community types, grade spans, and program models.
Each grantee must be a partnership that includes a local educational agency and community-based outdoor learning providers. The Superintendent may hire a nonprofit intermediary to coordinate grant criteria, technical assistance, and a grantee community of practice, and must select a statewide evaluator (or authorize site evaluators using a common framework) to measure outcomes like attendance, engagement, academic achievement, environmental literacy, and pupil health.
The pilot’s findings will be summarized publicly and a final report submitted to the Legislature; the pilot expires on January 1, 2032, and only proceeds if the Legislature appropriates funds.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Superintendent must publish statewide outdoor-learning guidance by July 1, 2028, with minimum content areas spelled out in statute.
The guidance must include explicit strategies to ensure equitable access for unduplicated pupils, pupils with disabilities, and English learners.
The pilot will fund six sites across northern, central, and southern California, and each selected site must include a local educational agency plus one or more community-based outdoor learning providers.
The Superintendent may contract with an intermediary nonprofit to design selection criteria, provide technical assistance, and coordinate a community of practice; a single statewide evaluator (or harmonized site evaluators) will assess pilot outcomes.
The pilot is appropriation-dependent, runs for three years after funding, requires a final public report submitted to the Legislature, and the statutory pilot authority sunsets on January 1, 2032.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Findings and legislative intent
This provision records legislative findings linking outdoor learning to environmental literacy, academic and health benefits, and inequitable access in underserved communities. Practically, it frames outdoor learning not as optional enrichment but as a recognized instructional method and creates the statutory basis for later mandates on guidance and pilot support.
Key definitions
The bill defines core terms that control scope and eligibility: environmental literacy (tied to existing Public Resources Code standards), local educational agency (district, county office, charter), and a broad operational definition of outdoor learning that explicitly covers built and natural outdoor environments. These definitions matter because they determine what programs and partners qualify for guidance, grants, and evaluation under the statute.
Recognition and encouragement of local implementation
This section formally recognizes outdoor learning as developmentally appropriate and encourages LEAs to integrate it across subject areas and to describe outdoor learning strategies in local control and accountability plans (LCAPs) or other planning documents. Importantly, the statute stops short of mandating curriculum, preserving local flexibility while signaling that districts may legitimately include outdoor learning in their accountability narratives.
Statewide guidance and professional learning
The Superintendent must develop guidance covering best instructional practices, safety and risk management, equity strategies, site-improvement models, and partnership approaches, after consulting county offices, educators, tribes, and community organizations. The statute allows the Superintendent to provide professional learning only if the Legislature appropriates funds, and requires alignment between any training offered and the published guidance—tying future capacity-building to the guidance content.
Statewide Outdoor Learning Pilot Program
This is the programmatic core: a three-year pilot (post-appropriation) funding six grantees with regional representation and diverse program models. Each site must be a partnership including an LEA and community providers. The Superintendent may engage an intermediary nonprofit to develop selection criteria, provide technical assistance, and coordinate grantees; must select a statewide evaluator (or require a common evaluation framework); may use funds for implementation, evaluation, communications, site visits, and learning community activities; and must publish interim summaries and a final report to the Legislature. The pilot exists only with legislative appropriation and the authority sunsets on January 1, 2032.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Students in historically underserved or pollution-burdened communities — the bill prioritizes them for pilot implementation and requires strategies in guidance to improve their access to outdoor learning.
- Classroom educators and LEAs that receive guidance and (subject to funding) professional learning — they get a state-aligned framework, safety guidance, and models for integrating outdoor instruction into standards-aligned curricula.
- Community-based outdoor learning providers and parks/tribal partners — the pilot and guidance create formal pathways for partnership, potential contract or grant revenue, and roles within a coordinated community of practice.
- Researchers and policymakers — a mandated evaluation and final report create curated evidence on outcomes (attendance, engagement, academic measures, environmental literacy, mental and physical health) to inform future statewide decisions.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local educational agencies — even with grants, districts may incur planning, transportation, supervision, and maintenance costs to expand outdoor learning that are not fully covered by the pilot or future funding.
- California Department of Education (Superintendent’s office) — the department must develop guidance, manage the grant process, contract with intermediaries/evaluators, and publish reports, duties that require staff time and appropriation.
- State budget/Legislature — pilot operations, professional learning, intermediary contracts, and evaluation are explicitly dependent on new appropriations; scaling beyond the pilot will require additional budget decisions.
- Intermediary nonprofits and evaluators — while eligible for contracts, they will face deliverable and reporting obligations and must build the administrative capacity to coordinate grantees and produce cross-site evaluation.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill aims to expand equitable access to outdoor learning statewide while preserving local flexibility and requiring the state to pilot and evaluate programs—but it relies on limited, discretionary funding and a small demonstration footprint, creating a trade-off between rigorously testing models and actually delivering immediate, equitable access at scale.
The bill ties meaningful implementation to legislative appropriations at several junctures, which creates a deployment risk: if funding is absent or limited, guidance may exist without parallel professional learning or pilot activity, leaving local districts to implement without state support. The pilot’s small size—six sites—helps manage costs and test diversity of models but limits statistical power and may not produce generalizable results across California’s heterogeneous districts.
Selection mechanics are under-specified in statute: while the Superintendent may contract with an intermediary to develop criteria, the bill leaves candidate eligibility, award amounts, and evaluation metrics to administrative process. That uncertainty creates signaling and equity risks—districts with grant-writing capacity and existing community partnerships are better positioned to win awards, which could skew outcomes toward better-resourced sites.
The broad statutory definition of outdoor learning is helpful for inclusion but also risks uneven interpretation about what counts as standards-aligned outdoor instruction; the statute does not set liability, transportation, or staffing funding requirements, which are common implementation choke points.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.