The Brief

Roughly a month after the Los Angeles Unified School District revoked its AI chatbot, Ed, communities of parents, teachers and experts are demanding that the school district respond to their concern that the short-lived association with AllHere, the company that built and supported the program, has potentially compromised data on the district’s larger educational priorities.

“While we welcome technological advancements, it’s crucial to engage in transparent discussions with educators, educational staff, parents, and policymakers about the risks and impacts of AI in schools,” said Cecily Myart-Cruz, president of United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA), in a statement.

UTLA also encouraged the district to engage outside counsel and move forward with an investigation. Myart-Cruz also emphasized in the statement that any AI tools moving forward are part of collective bargaining.

School board member Rocío Rivas said in a July 31 Facebook post that the district has “initiated investigations” to look into allegations of compromised data.

A spokesperson for LAUSD said on July 15 that regardless of what happens to AllHere, student data will be protected by security measures that forbid the company from storing student data outside the U.S., unless the district grants the company permission to do so.

The lead-up

In March, LAUSD rolled out the red carpet to introduce Ed, a smiling sun chatbot designed to serve as a personal assistant for students — capable of connecting them to mental health resources, informing them of cafeteria menus and waking them up in the morning.

The district has repeatedly justified its decision to use AllHere.

“Los Angeles Unified launched a rigorous and competitive RFP (request for proposal) process and adhered to the District’s procurement process,” a district spokesperson told EdSource. “What we intended to develop did not readily exist as an off-the-shelf product, and we needed to build this from the ground up.”

The district considered three entities — AllHere, Afirma and Kokomo 24/7, which LAUSD collaborated with to provide telehealth services — and paid AllHere roughly $3 million for the product.

Carvalho said the bot was also designed to nudge students who are falling behind and allow them to click on resources for help. He also reassured the March event’s attendees that agencies at various levels — local, state and national — would help monitor any cybersecurity concerns.

At the time, he acknowledged that Ed might endure some challenges but that the district was committed to its success.

“Just like humans are not perfect — although sometimes, in certain political circles, some say they are — the technology produced by humans isn’t perfect either,” Carvalho said at the March event.

“With all of the protections against the vulnerabilities, there is always a concern. That’s why we are over vigilant,” he said.

The rollout

Ed was supposed to be rolled out in phases — beginning with the district’s 100 priority schools.

Three months later, on June 14, alarms began to sound, and AllHere had furloughed the bulk of its staff due to financial challenges, The 74 reported. Meanwhile, the CEO left.

In response — and because AllHere staff were unable to supervise it — the district removed the chatbot feature. LAUSD, however, still owns Ed, the district spokesperson confirmed, and the resource is still largely available to families.

The LAUSD spokesperson said Ed’s chatbot will return to families when the “human-in-the-loop aspect is re-established.”

“Los Angeles Unified was surprised by the financial disruption to AllHere. We were not made aware of any red flags concerning the organization, its solvency, or any financial issues,” the district spokesperson said.

“We had every confidence in their ability to develop a solid product. We, like other districts, were notified of their financial collapse and immediately ceased payment for a pending invoice.”

The spokesperson also said that the district has not found a connection between what happened at AllHere and a data breach known as the Snowflake incident, adding that AllHere “does not maintain data on Snowflake.”

Concerns over potentially compromised data have remained in the LAUSD community since, leading the district to begin investigating.

The pushback

While Los Angeles Unified remains committed to Ed, community members and experts at the University of Southern California Rossier School of Education continue to express their concern about student safety and the district’s priorities.

“All we want are smaller class sizes and happy teachers. Basic stuff,” said Joanna Belson, the parent of a senior at North Hollywood High School, whose sister teaches in the district. “We don’t want Ed. We don’t want AI.”

She added that the district should instead spend its money on expanding music and arts education — and extending sports programs to middle schools.

Echoing Belson, Alicia Baltazar, another LAUSD parent, voiced concerns about any potential data compromise, saying the district’s newfound emphasis on AI contradicts its new decision to ban cellphones in school. She added that the district should instead spend the money on bolstering its staff.

“I don’t know … how I’m going to tell my kid: ‘Stay off your cellphone. Don’t touch that at all. But here, use your laptop all day long. Use your chatbot,’” she said.

For Yasemin Copur-Gencturk, a professor at USC, the concerns lie in the technology itself.

Where the evidence?

Copur-Gencturk said there’s no evidence that the tool can accomplish what the district said it can do: promote academic recovery.

“AI has incredible potential to transform education and improve educational outcomes. There is no doubt about that. But there is a big ‘if,’” Copur-Gencturk said. “And I think many are ignoring that part. Most of the AI-based tools are not designed based on what we have learned from research on teaching and learning.”

She said, for example, that AI tends to take each learning goal separately, without considering how concepts build on or connect to one another. This is particularly common in subjects like mathematics and could negatively impact students’ learning experience.

School districts, she said, should not spend large sums of money on AI unless they are certain the necessary security measures are in place and will have the positive academic impact they are seeking.

“There’s a notion that as long as artificial intelligence is involved, or a newer technology is involved, it will solve the problems,” Copur-Gencturk said. “Unfortunately, life is not that simple. We really need to, as educators, as administrators, we really need to be more cautious.”

Beyond Los Angeles Unified

While LAUSD has struggled with its rollout of Ed, districts across the nation that are contemplating incorporating AI could feel the effects, said Robin Lake, the director of the nonprofit Center for Reinventing Public Education.

“We never want to see things like that happen, and it’s obviously a setback for LAUSD in their goals for that tool,” Lake said. “But it’s also potentially a setback for other districts around the country who might look to LAUSD and think, ‘Oh, no, I don’t want to take any risks at all around AI, because I don’t want to end up in the newspaper.’”

She also said LAUSD’s story could serve as a reminder for other districts to roll out any AI features more slowly and more carefully, especially amid a “gold rush of providers” and a desire to remain ahead of the curve.

Lake also emphasized the importance of the education communities coming together to communicate their needs to education technology companies — and stressed the need for state and federal governments to provide better guidance to help ensure AI is woven into education equitably.

Despite the challenges, however, Lake maintained that AI has incredible potential to transform education — and that a “couple blowups” experienced by one district should not deter others from pursuing AI tools.

“Could AI help transform the teaching profession? Could AI help address student mental health crises? Could AI help improve assessments in education?” Lake said.

“There’s so many, so many possibilities. There’s still big questions around all of them, but as times get tighter around money, as federal funding goes away, we really must look to all potential solutions, and AI should be one of those.”

The crisp, cool weather continues Tuesday as the region prepares for another Santa Ana wind event on Wednesday.

Highs along the coast on Tuesday will be from 63 to 69 degrees, and up to 72 degrees for the valleys.

The Inland Empire will see daytime highs of up to 71 degrees.

In the Antelope Valley, there will be some areas of frost in the early morning, with temperatures ranging from 56 to 62 degrees.

Beach hazards

You'll want to avoid swimming in the ocean because of strong rip currents and breaking waves from high surf. Minor flooding of beach parking lots is possible. These conditions will last until Friday morning for the Orange County coast, and until Saturday morning for L.A. County beaches.

No burn alert in effect

The South Coast Air Quality Management District has issued a no burn alert for most of SoCal until 11:59 p.m. because of high air pollution. That means you should avoid any burning of wood, including fireplaces or manufactured logs made from wax or paper. The alert applies to O.C. and L.A. County's non-desert areas, as well as Riverside and San Bernardino counties.

After Los Angeles moved to significantly lower yearly increases in most of the city’s apartments, some City Council members now want to change the rules again. This time, they’re hoping to give small landlords the ability to raise rents more than their corporate counterparts.

On Tuesday, the council is scheduled to vote on a proposal that would let small landlords — those who own 10 units or fewer — raise rents by an additional 1% each year. The idea was put forward by Councilmembers John Lee and Monica Rodriguez.

“This modest adjustment recognizes the difference between a family that owns a few units and a large corporate operator,” Lee said in a statement to LAist. “Our goal is to keep small landlords in the system and prevent the loss of rent-controlled homes.”

While the idea is gaining support from landlord groups, tenant advocates say the proposal would create a cumbersome and unfair, two-tier system in which some renters have to pay more than others.

The changes coming for LA rent control 

In a culmination of years of debate, the City Council voted last month to lower the maximum allowable rent increase in the city’s rent-controlled housing to 4% per year. That’s down from the previous maximum of 10%.

Lee, whose district includes the northwest San Fernando Valley, voted against the changes after expressing concern about how the lower increases would affect the bottom line of small rental property owners. Rodriguez, whose district includes the northeast San Fernando Valley, supported the changes, but said more should be done to keep “mom-and-pop” landlords afloat.

“The motion proposes a modest adjustment to help ensure these small landlords remain viable, rather than being pushed out and accelerating the further corporatization of housing in Los Angeles,” Rodriguez said in a statement to LAist.

Landlord groups said the proposed 1% increase could help at the margins, but small landlords would still have to contend with insurance premiums and maintenance costs that have been rising faster than overall economic inflation.

“Throwing a bone in the form of an additional 1% to smaller owners is necessary but will be insufficient to keep many owners in the housing business,” Daniel Yukelson, executive director of the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, said in an email. “More and more, owners are being forced to look for the exit ramp in the city of Los Angeles.”

Do small landlords really have it harder?

But researchers paid to investigate the issue have not found evidence that small landlords face stronger headwinds than corporate owners. A city-commissioned report by the Economic Roundtable, an independent research nonprofit, found no significant differences between the financial health of small and large landlord operations in L.A.

“The study found that, in general, small landlords are not suffering greater distress,” Anna Ortega, who is with the city’s Housing Department, said during a recent City Council meeting.

Tenant advocates with the group Keep L.A. Housed opposed the 1% bump for small landlords, saying it would be unfair to charge some tenants more every year simply because they’re renting from a non-corporate owner. The coalition also said enforcing the rules would be difficult.

“Allowing small landlords to self-certify creates the opportunity for abuse, as some will fraudulently claim the status and charge incorrect (and potentially illegal) rent increases to already rent-burdened tenants,” said Pablo Estupiñan, a Keep L.A. Housed member and an organizer with the nonprofit Strategic Actions for a Just Economy.

The rules in LA and beyond

The city’s rent control rules generally apply to rental units built before October 1978, though some newly built apartments are covered as well. About 70% of the city’s apartments are subject to the rent hike caps.

Some other Southern California jurisdictions with rent control allow small landlords to increase rents more than larger owners.

L.A. County allows small landlords in unincorporated areas to increase rents an extra 1%. The city of Inglewood allows owners of buildings with four apartments or fewer to increase rents by an extra 5% compared with owners of buildings with five or more units.

Santa Ana’s Ayuda Sin Fronteras — a fund to support immigrant families affected by ICE sweeps — could more than double with an additional $150,000 influx of city dollars if approved by the City Council Tuesday night.

The federal immigration sweeps have increased fear among immigrant families, prompting some to avoid workplaces and other public areas. The fund goes toward helping those families pay for up to one month’s worth of housing expenses, including past due rent and utility bills.

The program was created in July following heavy immigration enforcement that rattled many communities in Southern California, including Orange County’s only sanctuary city — Santa Ana.

When it launched, the city approved an initial $100,000 for housing assistance. In October, the City Council directed the city manager to seek additional funding for approval. Those funds were pulled from several city department employee vacancies, including the city attorney’s office, the Santa Ana Police Department and others.

Ayuda Sin Fronteras has supported 232 residents as of Oct. 21, according to city officials.

Mayor Valerie Amezcua said she will revisit the fund as much as possible to make sure the city is doing all it can to support community members affected by immigration enforcement.

“We need to make sure that we take good care of our community because there is a need,” Amezcua told LAist. “There's a need for rental assistance, for food, for utilities. As the mayor and council, we're committed to helping out our community.”

Who qualifies? 

The funds are reserved for Santa Ana families with members who have been detained, deported or financially hurt by immigration enforcement. Families will need to provide proof of immigration enforcement activity or a signed third-party verification form.

The program requires identification of all household members, but the city says it does not require proof of citizenship.

Applicants need to be renters at or below moderate income. A family of five, for example, needs to make no more than $177,000 a year. The city’s income chart can be found here.

Other help is available 

In Orange County, Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento created the Orange County Liberty Fund in partnership with community organizations, bringing together $1.5 million to support immigrant families in navigating the legal system.

In September, the Costa Mesa City Council launched a $200,000 immigrant legal defense fund to help those detained by ICE within the city.

Outside Orange County, the cities of Los Angeles and Long Beach, along with L.A. County, have asked for support from local philanthropists to donate to immigrant support funds.

Los Angeles’ regional homelessness agency is working to find ways to keep thousands of people in their homes, while complying with new federal funding restrictions on permanent housing.

The governing board for the L.A. Homeless Services Authority voted Monday to start the process of reallocating about $130 million in federal funding currently being spent on permanent housing to other projects meant to serve unhoused Angelenos.

Because of new funding restrictions from the U.S. Office of Housing and Urban Development, known as HUD, about 5,000 households in the county will lose their rental subsidies, according to several LAHSA officials who spoke at a commission meeting Monday.

Those changes, along with state and county funding shortfalls for homeless services, threaten to drastically worsen the region’s homelessness crisis, they said.

"The fact of the matter is there’s going to be a tremendous and terrible impact on people, on agencies, on landlords,” said Nathaniel VerGow, LAHSA’s chief program officer.

Officials said they’re scrambling to maximize federal funding under the new guidelines while also advocating against the new HUD policy.

“It is a cliff and it feels catastrophic, but I think it forces us as a region to figure out how to save ourselves,” LAHSA Commission Chair Amber Sheikh said.

The funding challenge

Most federal homelessness dollars flow into the L.A. region through the Continuum of Care program, managed by HUD.

The Los Angeles region is eligible for more than $260 million in federal funding under that program in the coming fiscal year, including $217 million for existing projects.

But no more than 30% of those funds can go toward permanent housing projects, according to a “notice of funding opportunity” HUD issued last month.

That’s a challenge for L.A. County, because 90% of regional HUD funds currently cover people’s rent, according to LASHA officials.

Instead, L.A. and other cities and counties must spend the bulk of their federal funds on other interventions, including transitional housing and street outreach.

HUD officials have said the policy is meant to encourage self-sufficiency.

At Monday’s meeting, Commissioner Justin Szlasa urged his colleagues to consider larger funding trends.

“ There's actually a 23% increase in available funding from HUD, the federal government,” he said. “It just doesn't work with the way that we normally have done things here.”

“We need to find, in this crisis, a way to be constructive about this,” Szlasa added.

HUD policy changes

HUD released its new notice of funding opportunity last month and rescinded a previous two-year funding agreement.

Opponents have concerns with the federal housing department’s move away from “housing first” approaches. They also said HUD rolled out the changes without providing enough time to prepare service providers and clients for disruptions.

Last week, 21 states, including California, sued HUD, claiming the new federal policies “essentially guarantee that tens of thousands of formerly homeless individuals and families will be evicted back into homelessness.”

This week, a group of cities and homelessness organizations also sued over the changes. Plaintiffs include the city and county of San Francisco. The Continuum of Care for San Francisco was awarded $56 million in federal funding for Fiscal Year 2024.

Approximately 91% of that funding supports permanent housing projects, according to the complaint.

What’s next?

The LAHSA Commission voted Monday to approve its request for applications for existing and new projects.

Providers must submit applications to LAHSA over the next two weeks, and LAHSA has until Jan. 14 to craft and submit a new application to HUD.

The agency is now talking with 130 contractors about the transition.

LAHSA is also working with some permanent supportive housing providers to convert their programs to transitional housing instead, officials said.

People who were in permanent housing projects aren’t eligible for transitional housing under HUD’s guidelines because they're not considered unhoused, VerGow said.

The commission also reviewed a policy for ranking project applications and prioritizing them for federal funding. Officials said that policy has to be approved at a LAHSA Commission subcommittee on Dec. 10.

Funds are expected to be awarded in May 2026.