Committee members heard testimony on the state’s broken special education funding and accountability systems and legislation [...]]]> The Education Law Center, along with the Arc of Pennsylvania, the Superintendent of the School District of Lancaster, and a school board member from the Sto-Rox School District, testified before the Pennsylvania Senate Education Committee on Nov. 1, 2011.

Committee members heard testimony on the state’s broken special education funding and accountability systems and legislation designed to fix those broken systems.

The Law Center’s testimony focused on the improvements established by SB 1115, including accurate calculations of special education students and connecting resources closely to accountability and outcomes.

Video and audio of the testimony is available on the Committee chairman’s website.

Please take a minute right away to click on the bill numbers below and see whether your Representative and Senator have signed on as cosponsors.
If you do not see their names, give a quick call to their Harrisburg office [...]]]> The special education reform bills have been introduced and are now on their way.

Please take a minute right away to click on the bill numbers below and see whether your Representative and Senator have signed on as cosponsors.
If you do not see their names, give a quick call to their Harrisburg office and ask them to immediately cosponsor this legislation.

If your representative and senator are already listed as cosponsors, call them to say a big “Thank you!”

The new bill numbers are House Bill 704 (yes, the same number as last year) and Senate Bill 1115.

Both bills are identical. Both are the same as the major reform legislation helping students with disabilities that we all worked so hard on last year. As you know, in 2010 House Bill 704 was passed by the House with bi-partisan support and came close to getting a vote in the Senate. We just ran out of time and had to start over in the 2011-12 session.

The newly re-introduced House and Senate bills fix the distribution and accountability of state funding for special education, aimed at improving opportunities to learn for children with disabilities.

You can find the Harrisburg phone number for your senator and representative here — http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/findyourlegislator/#address. Call their Harrisburg offices in the Capitol.

Talking points are enclosed below:

TALKING POINTS for calling the Harrisburg office of your own state senator and representative

· Please immediately add your name as a cosponsor for the special education reform bill, House Bill 704 or Senate Bill 1115. These bills have just been introduced.

· The lead sponsors are Representatives O’Neill and Sturla and Senators Browne and Dinniman.

· I am asking you to support reform of the state funding and accountability system for special education.

· This legislation was approved 173-25 by the full House of Representatives in 2010, and is now being re-introduced. The bill does not call for any new funding in 2011-12.

· The current funding system is broken, is unfair, and does not provide enough resources for special education in the right places. It sets the number of students eligible for state funding for special education at 16% regardless of whether the school district has fewer or more students receiving special education. It also does not focus the funding on strategies that have a track record for improving student performance.

· The school districts you represent need support for special education, and must be held accountable for results. The new bills address these issues.

· I have personal experience with how this broken system hurts children with disabilities and all students. (Describe your experience.)

· Thank you for supporting this important issue and signing on as a cosponsor of HB 704 and SB 1115.

· I will call back in a day or two to follow up.

This week Action United, Juntos and Youth United for Change joined the cause.

Thanks to all of the groups [...]]]> We’ve added three new groups to the already broad, statewide coalition of organizations supporting special education funding and accountability reform.

This week Action United, Juntos and Youth United for Change joined the cause.

Thanks to all of the groups for their efforts on this important legislation.

The legislation — which will have a new bill number in the coming weeks — addresses the current problems with the state systems for funding and accountability of special education for students with disabilities. The Commonwealth benefits when all students are educated and [...]]]> 1. What is the purpose and history of special education funding and accountability reform?

The legislation — which will have a new bill number in the coming weeks — addresses the current problems with the state systems for funding and accountability of special education for students with disabilities. The Commonwealth benefits when all students are educated and prepared for meaningful employment, higher education, and self-sufficiency.

The legislation does the following:

o Provide an effective formula to distribute state funding for special education, without creating compulsory annual targets or limiting the discretion of the General Assembly;

o Increase the accuracy of the special education formula by using three weights;

o Establish a transparent process to set the final formula weights through a legislative commission and subsequent regulation;

o Maintain spending at 2008-09 levels for 2010-11 if insufficient funds are appropriated;

o Streamline and strengthen school district accountability without imposing excess bureaucracy, applied when sufficient funds are appropriated in future years; and

o Maintain the Contingency Fund and make it more accountable and transparent.

2. Why is this the right time for fixing the state’s special education funding and accountability system?

First, most districts currently do not have the basic resources needed to provide a quality education to children with disabilities. Since 2003, the annual increase in state funding for special education has averaged only 1.7% per year. This has not kept pace with overall inflation (over 3% growth per year), with medical sector inflation (nearly 10% growth per year), or with increased numbers of Pennsylvania students with disabilities (2.6% growth per year).

Second, if we do not fix the system, the upward pressures on local property taxes will continue. It costs more to effectively educate children with disabilities than other students. Students have a legal right to receive quality special education services and programs from their schools (and are more successful when they receive it). Districts must help to meet these needs.

Third, the basic education reforms adopted in 2008 did not include special education. The basic education formula contains variables for students in poverty, English language learners, and district size, but not for special education.

Fourth, school districts will better invest federal stimulus dollars for special education and for basic education if they can accurately anticipate the state systems for special education funding and accountability in future years. The state funding and accountability systems for special education are broken and need repair.

3. How will the proposed legislation calculate and distribute state funding for special education?

The formula remains an independent line item in the state budget, separate from basic education. The formula acknowledges that the General Assembly will use its discretion to decide for each year about the level of state funding for special education and the amount of any change in funding.

The formula distributes any increased funding, determined by the appropriations decisions of the General Assembly, by taking into consideration a number of factors reflecting the unique circumstances of each school district. Factors include the base cost to educate all students, a different weight for each of three cost categories for students with disabilities, and districtspecific variables for student enrollment, actual spending, poverty, tax effort, and cost of living.

Three-year averages are used for many variables, ensuring stable funding levels for districts.

The distribution formula will include three multipliers and weights to better match real student costs, rather than a single variable, a single student count, and a single weight (1.3). Using three “cost categories” will allow the formula to more accurately distribute resources and avoid over-identification.

An actual student count will be used in the highest cost category to ensure distribution accuracy. A data-based statewide percentage of eligible students will be used in the two lower cost categories to balance the needs for providing accuracy and avoiding over-identification. This percentage will be applied to the actual total enrollment of all students in each district for the lowest cost category and to the actual number of students receiving special education for the middle cost category.

The final form of the variables in the formula will be determined by a legislative commission and implemented by subsequent regulations. The commission will use national accounting standards, share information, consult with stakeholders, work with PDE’s Task Force and the Advisory Panel, hold at least three regional public hearings, and receive overall support as needed from PDE. After the commission evaluates and develops the final variables in this open and transparent manner, the State Board of Education will enact the commission’s decisions into regulation.

The formula has been changed from earlier versions, so that it no longer includes a performance variable that pays districts additional funding for meeting both inclusion and achievement targets. Instead, a modest grant program will be established to allow school districts to seek recognition and support for the additional costs of implementing best practices for inclusion and achievement. Nothing in the bill, including the grant program, will change IDEA law or the authority of IEP teams for the placement of students.

4. What are the costs of these reforms?

State funding will remain at 2008-09 levels for 2011-12 if insufficient funds are appropriated.

Since 2003, the annual increase in state funding for special education has averaged only 1.7% per year. See #2 above for details showing that special education funding has fallen far behind inflation and other cost drivers.

The bill does not create compulsory annual state spending targets. It is assumed, however, that any increased funding in the future would provide a minimum increase for all districts without state funding cuts. The original terms of the bill, deleted in the current version, would have phased in about $36 million per year in additional state funding, with local districts also picking up their share.

5. How does the proposed legislation affect the Contingency Fund?

The Contingency Fund for extraordinarily costly students is maintained at current levels (one percent of the total special education appropriation) and with current standards for issuing the grants through PDE. The Fund is made more accountable with PDE reports to the General Assembly. The Fund is necessary because no formula can anticipate the extraordinary expenses needed for the most costly students with disabilities.

6. How does the proposed legislation provide accountability for special education?

The accountability system is streamlined and strengthened by incorporating the existing requirement for districts to implement three-year special education plans. The bill has been revised to ensure that accountability will be accomplished without imposing excess bureaucracy on school districts, while still addressing the academic and developmental challenges for eligible students. The district plans will be written in a manner that is easier for parents to understand and shall be made available to the public. PDE will more closely review the plans, will provide technical assistance to improve the plans, and will reject plans that do not meet state and federal standards. PDE will monitor plan implementation to ensure progress pursuant to federal performance indicators and shall identify districts failing to adequately implement their plans. PDE must withhold partial funding when district plans are rejected or when districts are not implementing their plans. PSBA and PSEA reviewed and approved the accountability provisions prior to the votes in the House Education Committee.

To cut costs over time, school district plans must describe programs and strategies targeting K-3 early intervention and also policies to ensure that students who no longer qualify for special education services are transitioned out. This section takes effect when funding is appropriated.

Districts will utilize new state funding, as appropriated, to improve programs and supports and other best practices that benefit students with disabilities, such as meeting state and federal performance indicators and providing curricula adaptation, co-teaching, assistive technology, school-wide positive behavior supports, supplementary aids and services, professional development, reading specialist services and supports, reducing caseloads for special education teachers and related services personnel, and/or placing eligible students in regular classrooms with supports in accordance with their IEP. School districts retain discretion to make the best investments.

7. What protections are needed to guard against over-identification of students for special education?

First, over-identification has not been a problem for many years in Pennsylvania. Since school districts pay for the majority of special education costs, there is no financial incentive to place students into special education. The proposed legislation could increase the state share of funding, but districts will still carry a larger share.

Second, the proposed legislation contains strict protections against over-identification:

(i) The bill supports current state and federal law prohibiting over-identification.
(ii) The bill requires the state to monitor special education data, to issue public reports, and to conduct a review if any district has an excessive increase in its enrollment numbers.
(iii) The formula provides funding based three cost categories and statewide percentages for two of the categories, thus minimizing the potential for overidentifying students.
(iv) The bill strengthens the current accountability system for special education, ensuring that districts invest new funding in effective programs with results for students and schools.

8. What is the background and current system for special education funding in Pennsylvania?

Prior to 1991-92, the state reimbursed school districts for 100% of the “excess costs” of special education above the average cost per student for basic education. After 1991-92, the state switched to a Census System, which was used through 2008-09. The Census System distributed a capped amount of annual state spending for special education based on relative student population in each district. In 2008-09, the state simply assumed that 16% of all students in each district need special education services. Actual student counts in nearly all districts are significantly higher or lower than this 16% assumption. Since 2008-09, the state has not utilized a formula but has maintained the same level of special education funding for each school district.

9. What is the current level of special education funding?

Pennsylvania’s state share of funding for special education is low. Local school districts pay most of the cost. This puts pressure on local property taxes in many communities. In recent years, state funding for special education has fallen behind state funding for basic education, receiving much smaller annual increases.

Special Education Expenditures in PA (2007‐08): Local – $1.5 billion (54%); State – $926 million (32%); Federal – $400 million (14%); Total – $2.8 billion.
Average annual increase in the last 6 state budgets: Special Education – 1.75%; Basic Education – 4.66%.

10. What is special education?

Special education is not a “place” for receiving instruction, but is a set of supports to help students with disabilities learn in the general curriculum according to their needs. Regular education teachers, with training, can usually meet these needs in regular classrooms with accommodations, supports, and services. These additional supports are often quite costly.

11. How are students with disabilities doing in Pennsylvania public schools?

Over 270,000 students receive special education services. The drop-out rate for students with disabilities is more than ten times higher than for other students. Teacher quality and academic achievement are much lower for students with disabilities. National data show that the unemployment rate of adults with disabilities exceeds 70 percent, partly due to a lack of quality education. These outcomes are not inevitable, as students with disabilities in wealthier Pennsylvania school districts have much better outcomes.

12. Why does special education cost more than basic education?

Emotional, intellectual, or physical disabilities can directly impact a child’s capacity to achieve key learning goals and milestones in the same manner as other students. This requires additional time, equipment and technology, materials, personnel, and effort. Costs have increased over the years as science has progressed, identification and treatment have improved, and shortages of trained professionals have developed.

Summary of Senate Bill 1115 and House Bill 704
as Introduced in 2011 by Senator Browne and Representative O’Neill

CONTACT: Education Law Center
Baruch Kintisch, 215-238-6970 x 320
Sandy [...]]]> Download a .pdf of the Summary.

Summary of Senate Bill 1115 and House Bill 704
as Introduced in 2011 by Senator Browne and Representative O’Neill

CONTACT: Education Law Center
Baruch Kintisch, 215-238-6970 x 320
Sandy Zelno, 412-255-6414

PURPOSE –  The legislation addresses the current problems with the state systems for funding and accountability of special education for students with disabilities. The Commonwealth benefits when all students are educated and prepared for meaningful employment, higher education, and self-sufficiency. Reforms are required at this time because most school districts do not have the basic resources needed to provide a quality education with supports and services for children with disabilities. The state funding and accountability systems for special education are broken and need repair.

SUMMARY –  The legislation is being introduced in the same form as adopted by the House in 2010, making the following improvements:

o Provide an effective formula to distribute state funding for special education, without creating compulsory annual targets or limiting the discretion of the General Assembly;

o Increase the accuracy of the special education formula by using three weights;

o Establish a transparent process to set the final formula weights through a legislative commission and subsequent regulation;

o Maintain spending at 2008-09 levels for 2011-12 if insufficient funds are appropriated;

o Streamline and strengthen school district accountability without imposing excess bureaucracy, applied when sufficient funds are appropriated in future years; and

o Maintain the Contingency Fund and make it more accountable and transparent.

DETAILS –

(1) The formula for distributing state funding for special education will include:

• The formula remains an independent line item in the state budget, separate from basic education. The basic education reforms adopted in 2008 did not include special education.

• The formula acknowledges that the General Assembly will use its discretion to decide for each year about the level of state funding for special education and the amount of any change in funding.

• The formula distributes any increased funding, determined by the appropriations decisions of the General Assembly, by taking into consideration a number of factors reflecting the unique circumstances of each school district. Factors in the distribution formula include the base cost to educate all students, a different weight for each of three cost categories for students with disabilities, and district-specific variables for student enrollment, actual spending, poverty, tax effort, and cost of living. Three-year averages are used for many variables, ensuring stable funding levels for districts.

• Overall, the formula will distribute special education funding with the goal of helping all students to meet state academic standards. Students with disabilities have higher costs than other students just to provide the basic materials, personnel, services, equipment, technology, and time and effort required to learn.

• Districts will utilize new state funding to improve programs and supports and other best practices that benefit students with disabilities, such as meeting state and federal performance indicators and providing curricula adaptation, co-teaching, assistive technology, school-wide positive behavior supports, supplementary aids and services, professional development, reading specialist services and supports, reducing caseloads for special education teachers and related services personnel, and/or placing eligible students in regular classrooms with supports in accordance with their IEP. School districts retain discretion to make the best investments.

• The bill does not create compulsory annual state spending targets. It is assumed, however, that any increased funding in the future would provide a minimum increase for all districts without state funding cuts. The original terms of the bill, deleted in the current version, would have phased in about $36 million per year in additional state funding, with local districts also picking up their share.

• State funding will remain at 2008-09 levels for 2011-12 if insufficient funds are appropriated. Since 2003, the annual increase in state funding for special education has averaged only 1.7% per year. This has not kept pace with overall inflation (over 3% growth per year), with medical sector inflation (nearly 10% growth per year), or with increased numbers of Pennsylvania students with disabilities (2.6% growth per year).

• The distribution formula will include three multipliers and weights to better match real student costs, rather than a single variable, a single student count, and a single weight (1.3). Using three “cost categories” will allow the formula to more accurately distribute resources and avoid over-identification. The final definitions for the categories and the weights will be determined through a legislative commission and then placed into regulation.

• An actual student count will be used in the highest cost category to ensure distribution accuracy. A data-based statewide percentage of eligible students will be used in the two lower cost categories to balance the needs for providing accuracy and avoiding over-identification. This percentage will be applied to the actual total enrollment of all students in each district for the lowest cost category and to the actual number of students receiving special education for the middle cost category.

• The final form of the variables in the formula will be determined by a legislative commission and implemented by subsequent regulations. The commission will use national accounting standards, share information, consult with stakeholders, work with PDE’s Task Force and the Advisory Panel, hold at least three regional public hearings, and receive overall support as needed from PDE. After the commission evaluates and develops the final variables in this open and transparent manner, the State Board of Education will enact the commission’s decisions into regulation.

• The formula has been changed from earlier versions, so that it no longer includes a performance variable that pays districts additional funding for meeting both inclusion and achievement targets. Instead, a modest grant program will be established to allow school districts to seek recognition and support for the additional costs of implementing best practices for inclusion and achievement. Nothing in the bill, including the grant program, will change IDEA law or the authority of IEP teams for the placement of students.

(2) The Contingency Fund for extraordinarily costly students is maintained at current levels (one percent of the total special education appropriation) and with current standards for issuing the grants through PDE. The Fund is made more accountable with PDE reports to the General Assembly. The Fund is necessary because no formula can anticipate the extraordinary expenses needed for the most costly students with disabilities.

(3) The accountability system is streamlined and strengthened by incorporating the existing requirement for districts to implement three-year special education plans. The bill has been revised to ensure that accountability will be accomplished without imposing excess bureaucracy on school districts, while still addressing the academic and developmental challenges for eligible students. The district plans will be written in a manner that is easier for parents to understand and shall be made available to the public. PDE will more closely review the plans, will provide technical assistance to improve the plans, and will reject plans that do not meet state and federal standards. PDE will monitor plan implementation to ensure progress pursuant to federal performance indicators and shall identify districts failing to adequately implement their plans. PDE must withhold partial funding when district plans are rejected or when districts are not implementing their plans. PSBA and PSEA reviewed and approved the accountability provisions prior to the votes in the House Education Committee. To cut costs over time, school district plans must describe programs and strategies targeting K-3 early intervention and also policies to ensure that students who no longer qualify for special education services are transitioned out. This section takes effect when funding is appropriated.

(4) To further prevent over-identification – in addition to using to the three-variable formula and the strengthened accountability system – PDE will directly monitor and report on identification rates in districts, conduct a thorough review of districts increasing the ratio of eligible students to all students more than 10% in one year or 5% per year over any five-year period, and shall withhold partial funding from districts with unjustified increases.

(5) PDE must provide public notice of the decisions and actions it takes pursuant to this law, as well as file an annual special education report with the General Assembly.

HISTORY – In the 2010-11 session, the special education reforms were considered as House Bill 704 and Senate Bill 940. The House gave its final approval to the bill on June 23, 2010 by a vote of 173 to 25.

Thanks to all of the supporters who have worked hard on this effort to improve Pennsylvania’s special education funding system.

WHO
All students, parents, advocates, and concerned citizens from ALL parts of Pennsylvania. (Especially, but not only folks in Chester and Delaware Counties.)

WHEN
Right now. [...]]]> WHAT
Contact state Senator Dominic Pileggi, Majority Leader, and ask him to allow a vote on House Bill 704 for special education funding and accountability reforms.

WHO
All students, parents, advocates, and concerned citizens from ALL parts of Pennsylvania. (Especially, but not only folks in Chester and Delaware Counties.)

WHEN
Right now. The official legislative session will end in a couple of weeks, so we could run out of time for this year if things are delayed.

HOW
Call Senator Pileggi’s Harrisburg office at (717) 787-4712 and leave a detailed message. Also, send him a polite and personal e-mail to dpileggi@pasen.gov.

WHY
On September 21 the Senate Education Committee held a hearing about HB 704. The Committee indicated that they will only vote for HB 704 if Senator Pileggi, as the Senate Majority Leader, first gives his approval for a vote both in Committee and on the Senate floor. We have met with most senators and know that we can win these votes if Senator Pileggi allows them to happen during the next couple of weeks.

A Summary of HB 704 is linked in the right margin. Watch our video from the 21st and hear what supporters are saying.

TALKING POINTS

These talking points will work for Senator Pileggi (contact him first even if you live outside Chester or Delaware Counties) or any other state senator.

• Please support House Bill 704 in the Senate Education Committee and on the Senate floor. HB 704 deserves your support and a vote before the end of the year.
• I am asking you to support reform of the state funding and accountability system for special education.
• HB 704 has 66 bipartisan cosponsors. It was approved 173-25 by the full House of Representatives in June.
• The current funding system is broken, is unfair, and does not provide enough resources for special education in the right places. It sets the number of students eligible for state funding for special education at 16% regardless of whether the district has fewer or more students receiving special education. It also does not focus the funding on strategies that have a track record for improving student performance.
• The school districts you represent need additional resources and support from the state, and must be held accountable for results.
• I have personal experience with how this broken system hurts children with disabilities and all students. (Describe your experience.)
• Thank you for supporting this important issue and voting for HB 704.

10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 21 in Room 8, East Wing, Capitol Building in Harrisburg.

Representative Sturla (our lead sponsor) will testify and present the bill to the Committee for consideration.

The East Wing [...]]]> The Senate Education Committee will meet and discuss our legislation for special education funding and accountability reforms, HB 704, at –

10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, September 21 in Room 8, East Wing, Capitol Building in Harrisburg.

Representative Sturla (our lead sponsor) will testify and present the bill to the Committee for consideration.

The East Wing is directly behind the main Capitol building, down an escalator and to the right.

PLEASE ATTEND THIS HEARING. BRING OTHERS WITH YOU. This is our one big chance in the Senate before the end of the year.

Consider scheduling a meeting or two with state senators from your area, after the hearing on Tuesday. Staff for your senator(s) are likely to be available, even on short notice.

The Senate Education Committee will hold a hearing at 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, September 21, 2010 on House Bill 704. The hearing will take place in Room 8, East Wing, Capitol Building. We’re encouraging people to attend and show their support.

House Bill 704 is [...]]]> ATTENTION: Disability Advocates, Parents, and Concerned Citizens

The Senate Education Committee will hold a hearing at 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, September 21, 2010 on House Bill 704. The hearing will take place in Room 8, East Wing, Capitol Building. We’re encouraging people to attend and show their support.

House Bill 704 is our legislation for special education funding and accountability reforms. The bill makes important improvements to benefit the education of children with disabilities.

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives approved HB 704 in June by an overwhelming vote of 173 to 25.  The bill is now in the Senate. At the hearing, Representative Sturla (our lead sponsor) will testify and present the bill to the Committee for consideration.  It’s important we show our strength at this hearing.

For more information about attending the hearing contact the Education Law Center’s Baruch Kintisch or Sandy Zelno.