01/30/2013 08:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SB17 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 17 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
January 30, 2013
8:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gary Stevens, Chair
Senator Mike Dunleavy, Vice Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins
Senator Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Bert Stedman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 17
"An Act extending the special education service agency; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 17
SHORT TITLE: EXTEND SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICE AGENCY
SPONSOR(s): SENATOR(s) STEVENS
01/16/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/16/13 (S) EDC, FIN
01/23/13 (S) EDC AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
01/23/13 (S) Heard & Held
01/23/13 (S) MINUTE(EDC)
01/30/13 (S) EDC AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
PATRICK PILLAI, Executive Director
Special Education Service Agency
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided supportive testimony for SB 17.
ELIZABETH NUDELMAN, Director
School Finance
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided supportive testimony for the
Special Education Service Agency.
ERIC GEBHART, Director
Board of Directors
Special Education Service Agency
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided supportive testimony for SB 17.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:03:14 AM
CHAIR GARY STEVENS called the Senate Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Huggins, Gardner, Vice Chair Dunleavy, and
Chair Stevens.
SB 17-EXTEND SPECIAL EDUCATION SERVICE AGENCY
CHAIR STEVENS announced the consideration of SB 17 and noted
that the committee substitute (CS) that was on members' desks
could be adopted at the next meeting. The intention today was to
further discuss the bill.
8:03:45 AM
PATRICK PILLAI, Executive Director, Special Education Service
Agency (SESA), said SESA's mission statement captured the
legislative intent of services that SESA was tasked to provide.
He said SESA tasks were as follows:
A. Itinerant outreach services to students with Low
Incidence Disabilities (LID). LID is defined as
disability occurring in less than one percent of
the total statewide K-12 enrollment.
B. Instructional support and training of special
education personnel and primarily that is the
teachers, paraprofessionals, and parents.
C. Services appropriate to special education and
that include creation of, for example, E-Modules
of the 13 categories of special education for the
Department of Education and Early Development
(DEED) website.
MR. PILLAI said SESA's legislative intent was connected to
federal law. He explained that according to the session
laws of Alaska, the Alaska Legislature created SESA to do
the following:
1. Make more special education and related services
available to students with LID.
2. Encourage communities of practice between
districts with respect to low incidence
disabilities.
3. Make available a qualified specialist to school
districts to ensure free and appropriate
education to students with low incidence
disabilities without regard to their location in
the state.
MR. PILLAI said SESA funding was as follows:
· Flat-funded for the past 14 years.
· Not linked to Base Student Allocation (BSA).
· Has not received funding increases received by
school districts.
He said SESA was funded through legislative appropriation and
followed the legislative process in seeking an increase to funding.
He noted that SESA was currently seeking an increase in funding.
He said the Division of Legislative Audit (DLA) Report calculated the
following:
· 36 percent depreciation of SESA's funding due to
impact of inflation. The adjustment addresses
inflation from 1998 to 2013 and does not factor
inflation from 2014 to 2021.
· Retention of staff has been severely impacted.
Specialists have rolled over contracts three
times without increases.
· Staff has 70 percent dependent-coverage medical
insurance, but 30 percent out-of-pocket for a
family of four was about $800, which makes it
very difficult to recruit.
He addressed the recommendation from DLA relating to increased
SESA funding. He said current funding was $15.75 [for each
student based upon Average Daily membership (ADM)] and an
increase would address inflation's impact for the past 14 years.
He stated that the recommended funding was $21.50 [per student],
an increase of $5.67. He said the reasons for SESA's funding
increase were as follows:
· To fulfill the intent of the legislature and the
mandate of 2004 idea.
· To provide competitive salaries to attract and
retain qualified specialists.
· To continue providing qualified services for
children with LID.
· To maintain a consistent infrastructure despite
short term or discontinued grant funding cycles.
8:08:08 AM
MR. PILLAI addressed SESA's funding based upon ADM versus SESA's
LID student count as follows:
· ADM enrollment has declined between 2001 and 2013
which impacted SESA funding.
· LID student counts have increased between 2001
and 2013.
· Increasing LID students meant increased
expectations of service from school districts.
When combined with a shortage of special
education teachers and many new special education
directors to the state, we have a greater demand
for guidance, support, and training.
SENATOR GARDNER addressed the decrease in ADM students and the
increase in LID students. She asked if SESA had shifted its
services and were less LID students being served.
MR. PILLAI replied that SESA was receiving a greater number of
referrals from school districts. He noted that part of the
reason was due to the rising numbers of students with autism and
multiple disabilities. He said SESA served 180 LID students in
2001 and 266 LID students in 2013.
He reviewed the impact from declining ADM on SESA's LID funding
from 2004 to 2013 as follows:
· SESA lost $212,847 between 2004 and 2013.
· SESA experienced inflation while being flat-
funded.
He said SESA had to do more with less funding due to ADM fluctuations
and LID student population increases.
MR. PILLAI addressed SESA's flat-funding in comparison to the
Consumer Price Index (CPI) and BSA increases as followings:
· CPI increased 36 percent from 2000 to 2012.
· BSA increased 45 percent from 2000 to 2012.
8:10:57 AM
He said actual SESA funding was declining while LID student
counts continued to increase.
He addressed LID cost of operations versus fund balances and
grant expenditures. He said SESA lost two grants in 2011 and
2012: Early Intervention for Vision (EIV) Grant and the Early
Intervention for Hearing Impairment (EIHI) Grant. He explained
that SESA held the EIV Grant for 20 years and the EIHI Grant for
eight years. He said the Alaska Autism Resource Center (AARC)
lost $84,000 in funding and SESA closed their Fairbanks
satellite office in response. He noted that AARC's funding cut
occurred mid-year while services were promised to school
districts. He said SESA's Board of Directors decided not to cut
back the promised services and noted that SESA absorbed an
overage of $15,000 in costs.
He said under-spending and reducing specialists to create a fund
balance was a double-edged sword. He said SESA was unable to
meet district demands for service and their SESA recruit
specialists burn-out.
8:13:09 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked what caused the loss of mid-year autism
funding.
MR. PILLAI answered that the Department of Health and Social
Services (DHSS) had anticipated federal funding that did not
come in. He noted that AARC received different revenue streams
from the Mental Health Trust, Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED), and DHSS.
He addressed SESA's challenge with operations planning and
grants applications. He explained that SESA planned operations
after their initial grant submission and actual awards were
typically less than the initial request. He said the process was
a moving target in terms of issuing contracts prior to knowing
what the grant awards were and added funding would allow SESA to
absorb the grant disparity.
MR. PILLAI said adequate funding would allow SESA to meet
legislative intent for a free and appropriate public education
to LID students. He explained that the current funding structure
was insufficient in order to provide school districts with
requested LID services. He noted that recruiting was adversely
impacted by the program's sunset uncertainty and its inability
to offer competitive health care packages to specialists. He
said quality applicants were lost to the Anchorage School
District (ASD) due to their ability to offer salaries that were
15 percent higher with full health coverage.
8:16:52 AM
He said the impact of continued under-funding to teachers, aides
and parents was as follows:
1. Reduced ability to promote evidenced based
practices.
2. Fewer on-site visits to provide targeted
interventions, especially with the LID
population.
3. Shorter visits to maximize travel dollars to
include more sites.
4. Less time for classroom observation and program
enhancement.
5. Loss of guidance to new special education
teachers and to classroom teachers encountering
unique disabilities.
6. Loss of child specific educational intervention
strategies modeled on-site to teachers. For many
of the teacher aides and paraprofessionals
without formal, college, or graduate education,
the best way of showing them how to work with a
child is to demonstrate onsite. Just lecturing or
providing reports did not help very much.
7. Reduced ability to recruit and retain quality
specialists.
He said not reauthorizing or under-funding SESA would remove a
state resource in providing services for LID students.
8:19:10 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if SESA was unique to Alaska or an
extension of a national or international program.
MR. PILLAI answered that each state had an organization similar
to SESA. He said SESA was responsible for the professional
development and training of special education teachers and
paraprofessionals.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked what states were similar to Alaska's SESA
program.
MR. PILLAI responded that most states had a rural component in
terms of training teachers and paraprofessionals. He said Hawaii
was similar to Alaska in terms of plane and boat travel.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if there were Alaska schools without
special education capabilities and an individual that was
professionally trained.
8:22:09 AM
MR. PILLAI responded that every site had a special education
teacher. He explained that many rural special education teachers
and aides lacked the skill-set necessary to provide a wide
spectrum of onsite assistance to LID students. He noted that
school districts that lacked the funds to train their special
education teachers brought SESA in for LID training and
certification assistance.
8:24:18 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked to confirm that SESA served 260 LID
students in 2013.
MR. PILLAI answered correct.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked about LID student distribution and the
number of LID groups that were served at the same location.
MR. PILLAI replied that [LID student] distribution varied from
site to site. He noted that SESA was created to initially serve
what was called the Rural Attendance Areas. He said since the
inception of SESA, major areas were also being served. He
disclosed that SESA recently trained 269 paraprofessionals in
the MATSU School District. He said on the other end of the
school spectrum was the Bering Straits School District which
required SESA's [individual LID student] assistance due to their
large geographic area. He addressed the Petersburg School
District that had a large number of children with autism and
SESA responded by training the entire [special education] staff
rather than providing itinerant services to each LID student. He
summarized that LID student grouping could fluctuate from one to
twenty in a particular district. He noted that LID student
grouping was dependent on a school district's isolation and
size.
8:26:12 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS addressed technology and the ability to provide
distance training without having to travel to a location. He
asked if SESA considered electronically delivering LID student
services.
MR. PILLAI responded that there was definitely a place for
technology and SESA was moving in the direction of distance
education. He said SESA used video teleconferencing and SKYPE.
He explained that SESA services were dependent on student
disability levels. He noted that some students might not
initially be able to use technology, but could transition to
technology use at a later date.
8:30:56 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS addressed the SESA report on geographical
distribution of LID students served. He noted that SESA served
four LID students in Anchorage versus 19 LID students in
Ketchikan. He asked why there was such a disparity when a larger
[population base] received less SESA assistance.
MR. PILLAI replied that ASD had their own personnel to handle
special education needs. He noted that ASD did not have the
deaf-blind expertise required for four LSD students and SESA
assigned a specialist to provide assistance. He pointed out that
the 269 paraprofessionals trained in the MATSU School District
would be reported as training and not as itinerant services.
SENATOR HUGGINS responded that he did not understand Mr.
Pillai's explanation when five times as many students were
served in Anchorage versus Ketchikan with both school districts
receiving the same BSA. He explained that he was not picking on
Ketchikan, but he asked why there was a major SESA disparity
between Anchorage and Ketchikan.
MR. PILLAI replied that ASC had a wider range of special
education specialists while Ketchikan did not.
8:33:49 AM
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked to verify that SESA provided services for
teachers and paraprofessionals.
MR. PILLAI answered yes.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked if SESA ever trained and worked with
parents.
MR. PILLAI answered yes. He said parents were brought in during
the training and the LID strategies were transferred between the
school and the home.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked if there was anything in statute or
SESA's mission that would prevent direct parental training.
MR. PILLAI responded that he did not think so. He said the
statute talked about itinerant services, professional
development, professional training, and other services as
appropriate. He noted that a parent was always part of the
itinerant training team and he did not see anything that would
prevent SESA from training the parent directly.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY described an example of a child in a public
school that had to be taken out of school but still required
[special education] services. He asked if SESA would be able to
work with the parent noted in his example.
MR. PILLAI stated that he thought SESA would be able to work
with the parent. He said SESA would be able to provide parental
training with adequate funding and SESA Board of Directors'
approval. He noted that there was nothing in the statute that
prevented SESA from directly training parents.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked what state would have a model program
similar to SESA.
MR. PILLAI replied that Hawaii does. He explained that Hawaii
extended services to the Marshall Islands. He said Vermont was
another state that had a program similar to SESA.
8:36:10 AM
SENATOR GARDNER addressed the linkage between the availability
of qualified special education teachers and the need for SESA
services. She noted that Alaska changed its statutes to allow
teachers to take their special education certification off of
their license so that they could not be transferred to a special
education classroom that they did not want. She asked if school
districts were generally able to hire as many special education
teachers as they required and if SESA assistance would diminish
if the trained special education teachers' pool was increased at
school districts.
MR. PILLAI answered that there was a national shortage of
special education teachers and noted that Alaska had many
unfilled special education positions. He mentioned that some
teachers did not show a special education endorsement on their
teaching certificate to avoid stress, paperwork demands, and
first time disability encounters. He said there was a recent
survey that showed 78 percent of Alaska's special education
teachers thought they were not adequately prepared due to the
vast demands of the field. He explained that Alaska had the
waiver program that allowed general education teachers to enter
special education after taking some course work and there was a
demand for SESA to provide training.
8:39:43 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked what percentage of students served by SESA
received high school diplomas.
MR. PILLAI replied that 68 percent of SESA's caseload was
intensive. He said it was hard to guess an exact number due to
the individual disabilities of each student.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked if SESA ever had a direct relationship
with a student's [Individual Learning Plan] (ILP).
MR. PILLAI answered no. He noted that the EIV and EIHI grants
had allowed SESA specialists to provide direct services to
elevate the skill level of the parent and support the onsite ILP
provider.
CHAIR STEVENS asked that the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) come forward and testify. He said the lines
drawn between SESA, DEED, and the school districts were vague to
him. He asked what would happen if SESA was to sunset and the
impact it would have on school districts and DEED. He stated
that SESA's funding was channeled through DEED with limitations
on strictly passing the funds along.
8:43:15 AM
ELIZABETH NUDELMAN, Director, School Finance, Department of
Education and Early Development, responded that DEED supported
SESA. She said SESA provided a statewide capacity to step in and
fill the gaps when services were needed. She referenced Mr.
Pillai's point that services were required on an "as needed"
basis and SESA had the specialists onboard to fill in the needs.
She noted that Mr. Pillai referenced efficiencies in that not
every district was going to have every specialist needed from
one year to the next. She said smaller districts were able to
reach out to SESA and ask for some special services to help them
with their cohort of students for a particular year. She stated
that DEED would not known who would fill the void if SESA was
not there to send specialists to a district that was servicing
their first LID student in five years.
8:45:24 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked why SESA was not part of DEED. He
addressed DEED's approach on handling supplementary-programs
beyond SESA.
MS. NUDELMAN answered that there could be various DEED diagrams
of where to place supplementary-services. She stated that she
did not know how SESA was split between HSS and DEED. She
explained that SESA was a link to a set of services and DEED had
the link to the school districts. She said it made sense to her
that DEED had some oversight and interaction with SESA. She
explained that SESA's funding was derived through the education
budget. She noted that funding could be done differently, but
the current system was working in the way that it was meant to
have DEED provide funding out to SESA. She said DEED reviewed
SESA's budget and annual audit. She noted that DEED's Director
of Special Education was a member of SESA's oversight committee.
8:48:02 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS stated that funding variables and capability
demands was addressed in the past. He noted that Juneau's school
district had the highest per capita requirement for children's
services. He pointed out that Juneau only had three people that
were having assistance from SESA and asked what allowed Juneau
to reduce their demand.
MS. NUDELMAN said SESA's mission was more towards serving
smaller communities without a special education specialist that
a larger community would have. She noted that a school district
may not have seen a specific disability for five years and SESA
would be able to provide specialist assistance to the existing
special education teacher. She said Juneau's population allowed
for economies of scale and the school district retained special
education teachers that could address LID students with a wider
range of disabilities.
8:50:45 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS addressed the disparities between Ketchikan and
Juneau. He asked how Ketchikan could have a demand from SESA for
19 students and Juneau had only a demand for three students.
MS. NUDELMAN replied that SESA's expectation was to serve
communities with smaller enrollments that did not have
specialists. She said given SESA's small community model, it was
not surprising that SESA did not serve as many students in
larger communities.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if the committee would be able to receive
information on the number of special education teachers and
students served in Juneau and Ketchikan.
8:53:03 AM
CHAIR STEVENS inquired how school districts decided on the
number of special education teachers to hire and budget for. He
said if he were a superintendent, consideration would be given
for additional SESA support when assistance does not impact a
district's budget. He asked if SESA charged a district for their
services.
MS. NUDELMAN answered that SESA's services were not charged back
to the districts. She said the districts used their funding for
hiring special education teachers and one-on-one aides. She said
with unique LID students, SESA would be called in to provide
additional support and training.
8:55:27 AM
CHAIR STEVENS pointed out the disparity between SESA services
provided to Ketchikan versus communities of similar size. He
addressed the compensation difference between special education
teachers in school districts and SESA specialists. He asked if
more was spent on special education teachers in districts or at
SESA.
MR. PILLAI answered that less was spent on SESA specialists
because school district employees received full medical benefits
and salary increases. He said SESA recruited specialists with
extended experience in specific areas and it was imperative that
the specialists knew more than the classroom teachers.
8:57:56 AM
CHAIR STEVENS addressed the proposed increase in SESA funding
from $15.75 to $21.50. He asked if SESA's goal was to be more
competitive and to bring the compensation for SESA teachers up
to the school districts' level.
MR. PILLAI answered yes. He said the two main ones were salary
increases and benefit coverage. He said a funding increase would
make it equitable and SESA would be viewed as an organization
that specialists could stay with for a long time. He pointed out
that it was not fair that time-of-employment and unused sick
days were not recognized when SESA employees were hired by
school districts.
8:59:37 AM
CHAIR STEVENS stated that DEED could oversee SESA in different
ways, but the same goals would have to be accomplished. He said
the current system worked and it may be best for DEED to
continue doing the job they were doing.
MS. NUDELMAN replied that Chair Stevens' statement was a
reasonable conclusion.
SENATOR HUGGINS commented that SESA's staff should be considered
to be "super special-education qualified" people.
MR. PILLAI replied correct. He said one of the greatest benefits
that SESA specialists had was their interaction and exposure to
multiple classrooms and schools. He noted that interacting with
parents was also a source of acquiring knowledge. He explained
that SESA specialists share their acquired knowledge with other
special education teachers. He said one of the legislature's
goals was to create cooperation in special education between
districts.
9:02:39 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if SESA had staff members that were
retiree rehires. He addressed the possibilities of leveraging
teacher-mentor relationships.
MR. PILLAI answered that SESA had "burnt their fingers" doing
some retiree rehires and his response was not intended to be a
blanket statement. He noted that SESA specialists had a high
degree of travel, slept on floors, and traveled in very cold
conditions. He said new hires could burnout quickly if they did
not enjoy what they were doing. He explained that due to SESA's
flat-funding, there were two main groups of applicants: new
graduates and retirees who wanted to see Alaska. He said the new
graduates did not have the experience to know more than the
special education teachers they were meant to assist. He said
the out-of-state retirees had great resumes, but some started in
August and checked out in January to leave at the end of the
year.
9:05:10 AM
ERIC GEBHART, Director, Board of Directors, Special Education
Service Agency, addressed the distribution of SESA specialist
throughout the state. He said sending a SESA specialist to a
particular school district was based upon the comparison between
the in-place experts and the need that was in-place. He noted
that a district's cadre of special education teachers changed
and the need for SESA assistance changed. He explained that SESA
assistance was based upon a district's special education staff's
expertise and not on the number of LID students.
9:09:03 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked about the demands from home schooling in
an area like MATSU and how to get in touch with SESA for
services. He noted that he was a home school parent and there
were a bunch of them. He said disabled students were also at
home schools.
MR. GEBHART replied that a disabled home school student would
have to be affiliated with a statewide program.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked how many home school students and parents
were receiving SESA services.
MR. GEBHART answered that he did know.
MR. PILLAI replied that he did not know, but was aware of
children who were medically fragile at home. He said he was not
aware of requests from home school parents for SESA services.
MR. GEBHART addressed SESA salaries and contracts. He said every
school district, as well as SESA, negotiated their own
individual contracts. He noted that not all of the districts
provided 100 percent healthcare coverage. He said the
Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB) conducted an annual
salary survey that every district received and the survey was
available to the legislature to review. He explained that SESA
was based out of Anchorage and ASD was used as the best
comparison.
9:12:11 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked to verify that SESA's [employee
compensation] was not quite competitive and their teachers were
not receiving the same benefit package that special education
teachers were receiving in school districts. He explained that
the committee should look at funding to allow SESA to be more
competitive.
MR. GEBHART replied yes, at least in Anchorage. He said he was
not familiar with every district in the state. He noted that
districts did their own negotiations and it varied from place to
place.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if SESA received any reimbursements from
school districts.
MR. GEBHART answered no. He said it was part of the statute that
SESA provided their services free to school districts.
MR. PILLAI confirmed that SESA provided their services free to
school districts.
CHAIR STEVENS said the proposed CS in the packets removes
language without the losing anything. [SB 17 was held in
committee.]
9:14:26 AM
There being no further business to come before the Senate
Education Committee, Chair Stevens adjourned the meeting at 9:14
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 01302013_SB17_SESA Powerpoint_Budget.pdf |
SEDC 1/30/2013 8:00:00 AM |
SB 17 |
| 01302013_CSSB17_versionU.pdf |
SEDC 1/30/2013 8:00:00 AM |
SB 17 |