David Mekeel: Changes to special ed-funding needed

For two decades, public school districts have received state funding for special education the same way.

State Rep. P. Michael Sturla hopes to change that.

The Lancaster County Democrat has authored a bill that would fundamentally [...]]]> A good column on HB 704 from the Reading Eagle‘s David Mekeel:

David Mekeel: Changes to special ed-funding needed

For two decades, public school districts have received state funding for special education the same way.

State Rep. P. Michael Sturla hopes to change that.

The Lancaster County Democrat has authored a bill that would fundamentally change special-education funding – eventually.

“The system has basically been flawed since it was changed 20 years ago,” Sturla said. “It makes the incorrect assumption that 16 percent of all students across the board have special needs.”

Right now, all 500 school districts are given special-education funding based on 16 percent of their student population. But while 16 percent of students in the state are in special education, Sturla said, the distribution of those students isn’t uniform from district to district. Passed by the House about two weeks ago, House Bill 704 would instead divvy up special education funds on more of a case-by-case basis.

The main change would be that districts would get funding based on the actual number of special-education students in the district, not simply a generalized 16 percent.

“The funding would reflect the actual numbers and the needs of an individual school district,” Sturla said.

The new system also would financially reward districts for successfully showing that students with moderate needs have improved enough to no longer need services.

Worried that such incentives could lead to districts playing the system, the bill calls for penalties for districts that mainstream students and can’t show that the students no longer need services, Sturla said.

While special-education funding has been a long-fought battle for Sturla – he’s been working on it for 15 years – he knows that his new bill isn’t a quick fix. To get it through the House, he said, the bill had to stipulate that the new funding formula would apply only to new money.

“It will probably take 10 years for everything to balance out,” he said.

And since special-education funding hasn’t gone up in the past few years, and likely won’t for the next year or two, it could be awhile until the bill’s impact is felt.

And, Sturla added, the state Senate doesn’t seem to be in a rush to act on the bill because no new special-education money is on the horizon. But Sturla says now is the time to act, so that when new money is available, a fair, sensible system is in place.

Originally Published: 7/9/2010

Changes to special ed funding needed

Contact David Mekeel: 610-371-5014 or dmekeel@readingeagle.com.

Here’s an excerpt:

State Rep. Mike Sturla calls it “outdated, unfair and … an abuse.”
He could have called it absurd, too.
The target [...]]]> There’s a great column on HB 704 by Jeff Hawkes in today’s Lancaster Intelligencer Journal.

Here’s an excerpt:

State Rep. Mike Sturla calls it “outdated, unfair and … an abuse.”
He could have called it absurd, too.
The target of his scorn is special-education funding in Pennsylvania.
The state, by law, must provide special-needs children with schooling that prepares them for work (or higher education) and for full participation as citizens.
But it appears the law is a weak stick in prodding lawmakers to do the right thing for kids with disabilities that get in the way of learning.

Making a special case for special education

By JEFF HAWKES, Staff Writer

State Rep. Mike Sturla calls it “outdated, unfair and … an abuse.”
He could have called it absurd, too.
The target of his scorn is special-education funding in Pennsylvania.
The state, by law, must provide special-needs children with schooling that prepares them for work (or higher education) and for full participation as citizens.
But it appears the law is a weak stick in prodding lawmakers to do the right thing for kids with disabilities that get in the way of learning.

Getting to the point(s)

There are two points to be made about the deficiencies in how we fund special education.

1. The $941 million that Pennsylvania gives school districts to help teach kids with special needs is, an independent study shows, inadequate by about 40 percent.
Perhaps you don’t believe an extra $380 million would make a difference. Well, you might find a chart on Page 17 of the study released in February by consultant Augenblick, Palaich and Associates Inc. to be edifying.
It shows a striking difference in achievement levels among special-education students depending upon the wealth of their school district.
In the 50 wealthiest school districts in Pennsylvania — those able to devote more resources to special education — 50.4 percent of special education students achieved passing scores in reading and math on standardized tests.
In the 50 poorest school districts, only 25 percent of special needs students achieved passing scores.

2. Now, if it wasn’t bad enough that Pennsylvania underfunds special education, the way it distributes the funds actually puts school districts with the highest percentages of special-needs students at a disadvantage.
Since 1991, Pennsylvania has simply assumed, based on historic averages, that 16 percent of a district’s students are in need of one level or another of special help and has funded schools on a one-size-fits-all basis.
On a statewide basis, 16 percent is a fair assumption. (The percentage right now is closer to 15 percent.)
But you know what they say happens when you assume.
The reality is that there is considerable variation in the distribution of special-needs students among the 500 school districts.
The actual percentage in 2007, for example, ranged from 8.1 percent for a Westmoreland County district to 27.9 percent for a Schuylkill County district.
Yet the state funded both districts as if 16 percent of their enrollments were special education pupils. One district made out; the other struggled.
(The range in Lancaster County went from a low of 10.9 percent in Manheim Township to a high of 21.2 percent in Columbia.)

Unfairness compounded

The consequences of irrational and insufficient spending on special education is, indeed, unfair, as Sturla says.
It’s unfair to the 71 percent of special-ed students who can’t find a job after high school.
It’s unfair to regular-education students who see dollars intended for their education go, instead, to reduce the shortfall for special education.
And it’s unfair to taxpayers, particularly those in districts that must hike property taxes to meet the needs of special-education students shortchanged by the state.
Sturla is prime sponsor of legislation to make special education funding fair. His bill would base funding on actual numbers of students in each district and give extra help to poor districts.
Fifty lawmakers have joined in support of Sturla’s bill, but no one from Lancaster County yet.
Let’s hope that changes.

E-mail: jhawkes@lnpnews.com