Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
03/20/2015 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB102 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 102-RESIDENTIAL PSYCH CTR; EDUC. STDRS/FUNDS
8:03:01 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 102, "An Act providing for funding of educational
services for students in residential psychiatric treatment
centers."
8:04:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 102, Version 29-LS0519\W, Glover,
3/16/15, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version W was before the committee.
8:04:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1,
which read [original punctuation provided]:
ON PAGE 2 at end of LINE 25 ADD THE FOLLOWING:
;and
(11) the center shall work collaboratively with the
school district where the student is enrolled to
coordinate an individual course of study that allows
the student to successfully transition back to the
school district were [sic] the student is enrolled.
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted.
8:05:36 AM
JANET OGAN, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of the House Education Standing
Committee, sponsor, offered her understanding that HB 102 would
address a gap in the way educational services are provided to
children admitted to residential psychiatric treatment centers.
Currently, the local school district where the residential
psychiatric treatment center is located is responsible for
providing the educational services to such children. However,
the education being provided in such facilities falls short of
what school districts are providing in school, oftentimes
resulting in such children failing to receive the courses
necessary to maintain a particular grade level, and this is
especially true for children [with special needs] who require
individualized education plans. The result of this has been
that children admitted to residential psychiatric treatment
centers fall behind in their education and have to repeat grades
when they return to their own school district, thereby
compounding their emotional and behavioral challenges, and
increasing costs to their school district. Because most of the
children admitted to residential psychiatric treatment centers
have their treatment paid for by the state, it is in the state's
best interest to ensure that such children really are receiving
the necessary educational services.
MS. OGAN said that under HB 102, it would be the school
districts where such children are from that shall pay for the
educational services being provided at the residential
psychiatric treatment centers, and the amounts paid shall be
prorated based upon the number of days such children receive
educational services at those centers. The goal of the bill,
she proffered, is to allow children [admitted to residential
psychiatric treatment centers] to fulfill their potential.
CHAIR KELLER indicated that the changes to Alaska statute
currently being proposed by HB 102 were requested by Evelyn
Alsup [of North Star Behavioral Health System,] and Michael
Lyons [of Universal Health Services of Delaware].
8:09:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON questioned whether it should be clarified
via conceptual amendment that the "valid teacher certificate"
and the "valid administrative certificate" referred to in the
funding stipulations on page 2, lines 6 and 9, respectively,
mean those issued by the State of Alaska, perhaps by adding, for
example, the word, "Alaska" after the word, "valid" on those two
lines and elsewhere in the bill as deemed appropriate by
Legislative Legal and Research Services.
MS. OGAN offered her belief that there would be no objection to
such an amendment.
8:11:18 AM
EVELYN ALSUP, Education Director, North Star Behavioral Health
System, offered her [incorrect] understanding that that issue
has already been clarified in Version W as amended. She then
relayed that she would be speaking in favor of HB 102. Sharing
her understanding of what currently happens with regard to
enrollment and funding when a child is admitted to a residential
psychiatric treatment center, she expressed the belief that
passage of HB 102, with its proposal to have the educational
funding routed through the children's own school districts to
companies such as hers, would result in the children receiving a
better education than they currently do. She indicated that the
existing problem results from the fact that the various school
districts in Alaska have different graduation requirements and
thus their curriculums don't align. Passage of the bill, she
asserted, would result in residential psychiatric treatment
centers providing curriculums specific to the school districts
from which the children come, thereby resulting in the children
being successful when they return to those school districts.
8:17:41 AM
MICHAEL LYONS, Vice President, Specialty Education, Universal
Health Services of Delaware, noting that Universal Health
Services of Delaware is the parent company of North Star
Behavioral Health System, asked the committee to support HB 102.
He opined that when children with mental illness are receiving
treatment, they should also be receiving what he called
"comparable and equitable educational services and funding," and
asserted that HB 102 would give companies such as his the option
of providing such educational services because they would be
receiving the funds to do so from the school districts the
children come from. He also asserted that this approach would
be much fairer to the school districts the children come from
because the funding for those children's educational services
would flow through those school districts. In conclusion, he
expressed appreciation for the committee's work on and support
for HB 102.
CHAIR KELLER, noting that the bill addresses the issue of
funding, relayed that the committee's interest is in providing,
on an equitable basis, the best service possible to all of
Alaska's children.
MR. LYONS, in response to questions, expressed interest in
ensuring that children receiving treatment at residential
psychiatric treatment centers are also being kept on track with
regard to their education, opining that this would produce the
best outcome in terms of those children being able to
reintegrate once they return home.
MS. ALSUP added her belief that HB 102 would assist companies
such as hers with integrating the necessary educational services
with treatment. In response to further questions, she offered
her understanding of some of the educational services currently
being provided to children admitted to her company's facilities,
and shared her belief that passage of HB 102 would allow
companies such as hers to hire their own teachers rather than
using personnel provided by the school districts where the
facilities are located.
8:44:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that the bill itself doesn't
address that issue. He then questioned the practicality of
requiring that different curriculums for the same grades be
taught in order that each child admitted to a residential
psychiatric treatment center may meet the specific graduation
requirements of his/her own school district.
MR. LYONS indicated that that wouldn't pose a problem because
it's the approach that's been taken in other states where his
company has facilities; it would just require that residential
psychiatric treatment centers obtain the necessary information
from the school districts where the children are from. In
response to a question about the funding stipulation on page 2,
lines 11-12, of Version W as amended that says in part, "the
center administers student assessments required by the
department", he indicated that his company would want to
administer to the children in its facilities any student
assessment required by either the Department of Education and
Early Development (EED) or the individual school districts.
MS. ALSUP concurred, adding that her company would communicate
with the children's individual school districts to determine
which particular assessments were required.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the funding formula located on
page 2, line 26, though page 3, line 6, and questioned what
amounts and costs it included.
8:50:04 AM
MS. ALSUP shared her belief that the intent behind using that
funding formula was to align the funding for educational
services provided at residential psychiatric treatment centers
with the funding for educational services provided at charter
schools. In response to further questions, she clarified that
currently the school districts where residential psychiatric
treatment centers are located actually provide the educational
services to the children admitted to such facilities, and retain
the funding for providing such services.
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ questioned what statute or regulation
stipulates that.
MR. LYONS spoke instead about a child's right to receive a free
public education.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER surmised that HB 102 would allow prorated
funding for educational services to go to the residential
psychiatric treatment centers.
MR. LYONS concurred.
CHAIR KELLER observed that the bill currently has a zero fiscal
note.
MS. ALSUP, in response to questions regarding the children
admitted to her company's facilities, indicated that the
specific population percentages fluctuate.
9:00:30 AM
MR. LYONS, in response to further questions, offered his
assurance that if the bill passes, his company would work with
the school districts where the children are from in order to
determine what specific educational services his company must
provide, and his company would then regularly provide
information about the children's educational progress to those
school districts; throughout, the children would remain enrolled
in their own school districts. This is what occurs in other
states where his company has facilities.
MS. ALSUP, in response to further questions, clarified that
currently, residential psychiatric treatment centers do not
receive any funds for providing educational services nor do they
provide any such services; instead, the school districts where
the residential psychiatric treatment centers are located send
personnel to those facilities to provide the necessary
educational services, including any individualized educational
plans for children [with special needs]. Education counselors,
however, are not sent by the school districts, and her company
does not make provision for them in its facilities. She shared
some population statistics related to some of her company's
facilities, and pointed out that currently, when a child is
admitted to a residential psychiatric treatment center, he/she
becomes enrolled in the school district where the facility is
located. She offered to bring the committee information about
which school districts the children in her company's facilities
have come from.
9:12:48 AM
DAVID NEES, mentioning that he was a teacher for 28 years, said
he'd had numerous students that had to [be admitted to a
residential psychiatric treatment center,] but at the time,
because of [federal] confidentiality requirements, he was never
informed about why those children were no longer in his
classroom. Instead, at some point, generally after about 10
days, what he called a "visiting teacher" would contact him to
obtain the absent child's educational material. House Bill 102
does not yet address the issue of such confidentiality
requirements, but it should, particularly given that it's
essentially proposing to provide public funds to private
institutions that they may in turn provide public education
services. In conclusion, he suggested that perhaps one solution
would be to "license" residential psychiatric treatment centers
as charter schools, and characterized HB 102 as a very good
bill.
9:16:31 AM
MARK FOSTER, Chief Financial Officer, Anchorage School District
(ASD), said that because the funding for educational services
follows the students during what he called the "count" period,
but not during the rest of the year, the ASD must frequently use
[funding] reserves to absorb Alaska's different enrollment
patterns and meet the needs of students. The belief held at the
ASD, he relayed, is that Alaska's current charter school system
distributes [educational] funds in a reasonable manner, and thus
the ASD encourages the committee to consider using that funding
model for distributing funds for educational services to
residential psychiatric treatment centers. In response to
comments and questions, he shared his understanding of how the
charter school funding model currently works, and again relayed
that the belief held at the ASD is that for purposes of
distributing funds for educational services to residential
psychiatric treatment centers, the charter school funding model
deserves further exploration, though the issue of what he called
"the geographic differential" might still need to be addressed.
MR. FOSTER, in response to further comments and questions,
relayed that should HB 102 as currently written pass, it is
estimated that for the ASD's current enrollment figures, for
example, approximately $1 million in funds - used primarily
though not exclusively for salaries and associated benefits -
would be shifted from the ASD to [residential psychiatric
treatment centers in their proposed new role as] providers of
educational services; it is also believed that there is a risk
that that amount will increase. Under the bill as currently
written, the ASD would no longer have the funds to support the
personnel it's currently sending to provide educational services
to children admitted to residential psychiatric treatment
centers.
9:31:53 AM
LINDA CARLSON, Assistant Superintendent, Instructional Support,
Anchorage School District (ASD), outlining what the ASD
currently provides in terms of educational services and
certified teaching personnel to the various residential
psychiatric treatment centers located within the district,
indicated that the children admitted to those residential
psychiatric treatment centers are already receiving everything
they need to succeed once they return home, because the ASD is
already providing direct individualized instruction and
education counseling, and collaborating with the school
districts those children come from in terms of the children's
educational progress and needs and those districts' specific
curriculum requirements. She mentioned that the ASD has
provided the committee with a letter outlining this information,
characterized the ASD's existing program for children admitted
to residential psychiatric treatment centers as very effective
and consistent, and indicated that there are still opportunities
for improving communication and collaboration and for
customizing curriculums.
9:43:02 AM
LUCILE HOPE, Director, Student Support Services, Matanuska-
Susitna Borough School District (MSBSD), mentioning that she
doesn't yet have a copy of Version W as amended, relayed that
she would be speaking against HB 102. She outlined what the
MSBSD has been providing to the residential psychiatric
treatment center located in Palmer in terms of educational
services, certified teaching personnel, curriculum materials,
and computer equipment; described how the MSBSD's arrangements
with that facility came to be, and what some of the ingoing
collaboration/communication with that facility involve; and
offered her belief that the MSBSD has been working closely and
effectively with that residential psychiatric treatment center
and its staff to ensure that the children make a successful
transition when they return to their own school districts. On
the issue of confidentiality requirements, she pointed out that
as part of Alaska's public-school system, the MSBSD - unlike a
residential psychiatric treatment center - already has the
ability to communicate freely with other school districts to
determine what a child's specific educational needs are and what
his/her home district's specific curriculum requirements are.
MS. HOPE, on the issue of education funding, pointed out that
currently there is no mechanism in place to transfer average
daily membership (ADM) funds to private facilities such as
residential psychiatric treatment centers, and thus passage of
HB 102 would require the development of a new accounting
process, which would cost Alaska's school districts both time
and money - resources that are not readily available at this
time or this year. On the issue of children [with special
needs] who require individualized education plans and who've
been admitted to a residential psychiatric treatment center,
although the bill stipulates that funding for providing
educational services shall go to the residential psychiatric
treatment centers, under the federal Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), it's the school district
where a particular facility is located that's responsible for
actually providing the educational services. She said she
doesn't believe that Alaska's school districts can abdicate that
responsibility to a private entity without a specific
recommendation from each child's "IEP team." She also observed
the lack of provision in [the original version of] HB 102 for
certified special education teachers.
MS. HOPE, in conclusion, suggested that rather than passing a
bill that would cost school district's money but not guarantee
quality educational services, that residential psychiatric
treatment centers instead work closely with school districts to
achieve the same outcomes they are hoping to achieve via HB 102.
9:49:37 AM
DENIS McCARVILLE, President and CEO, AK Child & Family,
indicating that his company has residential psychiatric
treatment centers in the ASD, relayed that he is in support of
HB 102, characterizing it as important mental health and
education legislation. The goal of the bill, he proffered, is
to ensure that children admitted to residential psychiatric
treatment centers are provided educational services that are
equitable and comparable to that provided to children in a
school setting. He asserted that that's not currently happening
and thus children admitted to residential psychiatric treatment
centers such as his tend to fall behind academically, and
indicated a belief that this problem would be remedied if
companies such as his were allowed to hire their own teachers
rather than using personnel provided by the school districts.
9:53:26 AM
WALTER MAJOROS, Executive Director, Juneau Youth Services, Inc.,
noting that he's submitted written testimony, indicated that his
company has residential psychiatric treatment centers in [the
Juneau School District,] and that he would be speaking in
support of HB 102. Referring to the testimony provided earlier,
he said it sounds as though the current system is working well
in some communities but not in others. He indicated that he
supports HB 102 because it would provide companies such as his
with the option of receiving funding to [hire their own teachers
rather than use personnel provided by the school district].
Mentioning, however, that his company's facilities don't
currently qualify for such funding under the bill's proposed
definition of "residential psychiatric treatment center", he
asked the committee to consider changing that definition.
9:55:44 AM
J. KATE BURKHART, Executive Director, Alaska Mental Health
Board, Division of Behavioral Health (DBH), Department of Health
and Social Services (DHSS), mentioning that the Alaska Mental
Health Board had many of the same concerns and questions that
were raised about the original version of HB 102, said that the
Alaska Mental Health Board thinks that under Version W as
amended, there is a balancing of the concerns related to funding
and treatment outcomes. She added:
We would never want to prejudice the services that our
constituents in their home school district receive,
for the benefit of students that have to receive
residential psychiatric treatment, and we think that
the legislative intent behind this bill and the
language in the bill does allow for the funding to
follow the student in a way that is not possible now,
and without necessarily prejudicing those students
back in the home district.
MS. BURKHART offered her belief that because the curriculums in
Alaska's various school districts don't align and the children
being admitted from outside Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Juneau to
residential psychiatric treatment centers aren't being provided
the specific courses required by their own school districts to
maintain a particular grade level, that passage of the bill
would result in improved treatment outcomes for such children.
9:58:01 AM
JEFF JESSEE, Chief Executive Officer, Alaska Mental Health Trust
Authority (AMHTA), Department of Revenue (DOR), said that based
upon his past experience working as senior attorney for the
Disability Law Center of Alaska, and his current experience
working for the AMHTA, he thinks HB 102 has a lot of very
positive potential, that it will materially assist residential
psychiatric treatment centers with the integration of
educational programing and treatment programing, and that it
will enhance "engagement" between such facilities and Alaska's
various school districts. In conclusion, he indicated favor
with the concept of having the funding for educational services
follow the child.
CHAIR KELLER announced that HB 102 [Version W as amended] would
be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB102.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Sponsor.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| CSHB102.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Fiscal Note EED-SS 3-13-15.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Support IDEA.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM |
|
| HB102 Support.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM |
|
| HB102 Support KANA.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Support AK Family.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM |
|
| HB102 Support Providence-Kodiak Counseling Center.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Support JYS.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Support North Star 1.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 North Star 2.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Support Kodiak Area Native Association.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 ASD Letter.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM HEDC 4/13/2015 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 NSBH Admissions and Teacher Pay.pdf |
HEDC 3/20/2015 8:00:00 AM |