Legislature(2003 - 2004)
04/30/2004 01:35 PM Senate HES
Audio | Topic |
---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
CSHB 425(EDU)-SCHOOL FUNDS RELATED TO BOARDING SCHOOLS (EDU) CHAIR DYSON asked Ms. Lindster to present CSHB 425(EDU). KAREN LINDSTER, staff to Representative John Coghill, introduced herself and advised that she would read the sponsor statement and some additional information into the record. HB 425 puts into statute Department of Education's current practice. This legislation supports existing programs that are successful. Under this bill a student wouldn't have to pass the current entrance standards. The bill would give students a choice of going to a school that offers something different than may be available in their hometown. This legislation by statute reimburses to full school year secondary boarding schools costs incurred by the district operating the program. The legislation limits the program to schools already operating boarding schools on January 1, 2004. There are five boarding schools that would qualify for reimbursement for a per-pupil stipend and one round trip between the student's community of residence and the school during the school year if the district expends money for the trip. These schools will participate in a five-year pilot project that the Department of Education will evaluate for the legislature. The hold harmless section of this bill allows a student's district of residence to count a student for the ADM count even though the student is attending a secondary boarding school. This avoids the possibility of paying the base allocation twice for the same student. MS. LINDSTER explained the sectional for the committee substitute: Section 1 (a) Provides that a school district that was operating a secondary boarding school prior to January 1, 2004 could be reimbursed for the cost of operating the boarding school providing they have a suitable student dormitory and provide daily access to a public school offering the grades 9-12 classes. (b) The district may be reimbursed for a per-pupil stipend determined by the Department of Education and for one round trip per student that travels from their community. (c) Defines district as "a city or borough school district or a regional educational attendance area. Also defines district secondary school boarding program as "a public school operated for a full school year by a district in which the domiciliary services are provided for students in grades 9 through 12. The full school year was added to the language in the Special Committee on Education and this resulted in a reduction in the fiscal note of $227,000. Section 2. Provides a hold harmless clause for school districts that have children move out of the district to attend a secondary boarding school. The students moving from the district would be counted in the average daily membership of the home district. Section 3. This is a sunset clause that repeals the substance of this bill on July 1, 2009. Section 4. Puts into place an effective date of July 1, 2004. CHAIR DYSON asked Eddy Jeans to join Ms. Lindster at the table. EDDY JEANS, finance manager for the Department of Education & Early Development, introduced himself. SENATOR GRETCHEN GUESS asked what the stipends are used for and whether Mount Edgecombe gives a stipend and round trip ticket to its students. MR. JEANS said the stipend is to pay for the students' monthly residential care, which includes meals and supervision 24/7. Mount Edgecombe does provide a stipend and one round-trip airfare from home for each student so this provision is consistent with the way that program is operated. Mount Edgecombe is not included in this bill because it's a state operated boarding school that's included in the Department of Education and Early Development budget. SENATOR BETTYE DAVIS asked whether the round trip is to and from a student's home community or did they receive one more trip than that. MR. JEANS said it's just one trip. SENATOR LYDA GREEN stated that she wouldn't define stipend in the same way. She then asked whether the parents of students with an IEP would be given transportation to and from the school. MR. JEANS replied it would be up to the parents to make arrangements and pay for their own trip to the school for an IEP meeting. SENATOR GREEN asked what happens at Mount Edgecombe. MR. JEANS said he wasn't sure. He thought that parents participated via teleconference, but the State didn't provide them with round trip airfare. SENATOR GREEN disagreed saying that was an issue that came up when she was on the governor's council and she recalls that those parents were provided transportation to the site for IEP meetings. MR. JEANS said he'd be happy to clarify that. SENATOR GARY WILKEN referred to page 2, line 4 and said that if the Legislature accepts "a per-pupil stipend determined by the department on a regional basis" then they are giving up their appropriation power and placing it in the hands of the department. He said he didn't know that he could be talked into that. He asked Mr. Jeans whether he was reading that correctly. MR. JEANS replied the reading is correct, but he wanted the committee to know that the legislation intentionally mirrors an existing program the Department of Education has for students that don't have daily access to a secondary program in their district or near their residence. Using St. George as an example, he pointed out that the school there is K through 10 so the students leave for grads 11 and 12. Then they go into another community and the state pays a stipend to help pay for the residential costs. The program has been in place for a number of years and the department has always set the stipends. He said he has a list of the stipends by region if that was helpful. CHAIR DYSON asked him to distribute copies right then if he could. MR. JEANS said he'd be happy to do so. SENATOR WILKEN said, "That may well be, but the passage of this legislation is a seat change in the way we look at funding schools so we may do it that way today. If we allow this with boarding schools, I'd like to have the Legislature involved." Referring to page 2, line 12 he said that agreeing to that would make it possible to have a school of one. MR. JEANS agreed the example is correct, but it's extreme and they don't currently have any schools that have fallen into that category. The intent of the provision is to provide a safety net for the communities that have a very low student population and are right on the threshold of ten. Representative Coghill didn't want the community to be penalized if a secondary school student elected to take advantage of this program. "We do understand your concern in having a minimum number and that was discussed on the House side although they never put a minimum number in this section." SENATOR WILKEN asked if this wouldn't result in double counting the student this way. MR. JEANS said the foundation formula has a base number of ten and from 10 to 20 students the funding level for the school remains the same. "So if you had, for example, 11 kids in a community and two of them elected to go to one of these boarding schools, that community would get the same funding that it would have gotten with 11 students. The school receiving the children is going to generate additional foundation funds, but they're generating these funds in these communities now. At Nenana and at Galena both of these programs are up and running and we're currently paying for these students in those regions." SENATOR WILKEN read the last sentence of the sponsor statement then used the example of a student moving from a 200-student school to one with 400 and asked if that wouldn't result in a double count. MR. JEANS said that example wouldn't work because if a student attended a school with 200 students and then moved to Nenana, the first school would no longer receive money for the child. Funding at the first school would be reduced by one child and Nenana would receive funding for an additional child. "It's only for those schools that are very small that may fall under that threshold of 10 students." Typically in those small schools there would only be one or two secondary students because the majority are elementary. He repeated it's just a safety net for the communities during this pilot program. SENATOR WILKEN referred to the last sentence of Section 2 of the analysis and asked if the statement that "students moving from the district would be counted in the ADM of the home district" applies only to those schools that would be ten or less. MR. JEANS said the last sentence of the sponsor statement is not correct when the school falls below ten students. The base is the same for 10 to 20 students. That community would continue to generate the base and Nenana would generate additional foundation funds for those students that fall into that category. SENATOR WILKEN pressed, "So we're paying twice." MR. JEANS said in that particular case you would, but once you exceed 20 students you wouldn't pay for the same student twice because the funding is then based on an individual student basis. "If you exceed 20 then you will no longer receive funding for that child if they move." CHAIR DYSON asked if he was saying that the school with 19 kids gets the same total amount as the school with 11 kids. MR. JEANS said that's correct, it's an economy of scale. You need a certain minimum to operate a school and when SB 36 was written it was decided that the minimum level would apply to schools with 10 to 20 students. Beyond 20 students, the per- student costs begin to decline. SENATOR WILKEN asked if the fiscal note includes just airfare or airfare and the stipend. MR. JEANS said it also includes the monthly stipend for the 180- day school year. SENATOR WILKEN asked for the amount of the stipend. MR. JEANS pointed out the information on page two of the fiscal note. The spreadsheet lists the school district, the community, capacity of the program, monthly stipend, yearly cost, estimated round trip, annual airfare and the estimated grant amount for the 180-day program. At the bottom of the spreadsheet they listed other communities that have boarding capacity but aren't currently operating for 180 days. He pointed that out because when they started with the bill they included all programs, but Representative Coghill only wanted to include the communities that operate a full 180-day program. CHAIR DYSON asked about the asterisk. MR. JEANS said that Galena has the capacity for 100 students, but eight of those students are currently being reimbursed under the Boarding Home program. The remaining 92 are the number for which they do not currently pay any stipend. SENATOR WILKEN said he needed a little more time to evaluate the data, but: To answer the question of what we save by doing this, he said they seem to indicate that we save $358,939.000. I think they're comparing that to the $3,958.00 that's a bricks and mortar ADM and I think the number they should be comparing is $9,667.00 so Eddy, if you could help me with taking this sheet and taking a different look at it to make sure we're comparing apples and apples. When we look at this, two things we should remember. When this was put in by the Department of Agriculture it was a grant from the Department of Agriculture to put in a boarding school and that's been funding this thing and we've been trying to help it along with offset grants and I remember the discussion well what if this doesn't work or what if it can't pay its own way. They're going to come to the general fund and we've now arrived at that day and we're now saying we want to fund boarding schools across the state and I'm not sure that's the best application of our education money. This amounts to a test case. The other thing is that back in 02 they had 1,567 correspondence students and we know correspondence students are, in my mind, a cash cow. In 04 they have half of that - 724. So they've lost a funding source just because their correspondence program has gone from zero to 1,900 and now it's dropped down on the other side to 700 so they may just be having a program problem - trying to attract the proper number of students to both their correspondence program and to the boarding school. I appreciate your patience and although I think this bill is well intentioned, it's much more expensive than what it shows and if this Legislature chooses to start funding boarding schools okay, but I would suggest that that money becomes competition for all the other schools that we have in the state and we want to make sure that investment is well spent. SENATOR GUESS remarked that she heard that this is a pilot program yet she also heard that "this is what we do now." If it's a pilot program, she questioned what would they be evaluating and what outcome measures were they looking for. MR. JEANS assured her it is a pilot program, but in terms of "what we do now" it models the current practice for those students that don't have daily access to a secondary program. "These are students that have elected to participate in these programs, maybe because they come from a small community, maybe because they have problems with things at home, ... but these students have elected to go to this program because of the consistency that's made available to them." SENATOR GUESS asked for an explanation of the outcome measures they were looking for in the evaluation. MR. JEANS said they'd be looking at achievement rates. He pointed out that this expands program offerings for all the kids, but particularly for the ones in Nenana because there are more kids there so more state funding is generated and expanded programs may be offered. SENATOR GUESS noted that the military youth academy wasn't included and asked if there was discussion about including them in the pilot program. MR. JEANS reminded her that they have their own separate funding mechanism, which is why they weren't considered for participation. SENATOR GUESS commented that the stipend language was worrisomely open and initially she assumed that stipend meant pocket money for the students. She asked whether there was a reason that they weren't specific. MR. JEANS replied they didn't have that discussion, but the monthly stipend comes from regulation. School districts often are contracting with parents for the residential care so it's a stipend to the parents that house and feed the students. CHAIR DYSON clarified the stipend would go to whatever home that's housing the student. SENATOR GUESS asked whether there were regulations ensuring the safety of these kids that go into other people's homes. MR. JEANS assured her there are regulations under the Department of Health & Social Services and they're also referenced under the Department of Education & Early Development boarding home program and he would provide her a copy of that. SENATOR GREEN held up a piece of paper and asked if this was the Department of Education & Early Development regulation on boarding schools. MR. JEANS said, "That's our current program that's limited to students that do not have daily access to a secondary program. SENATOR GREEN held up a piece of paper and asked it this was a list of the students who qualified. MR. JEANS told her that the students on that list have daily access to a secondary program so they would not qualify under existing regulations, which is the reason for the proposed legislation. It would expand the current program to provide funding for the kids on that list. SENATOR GREEN said," So these would be rewritten." MR. JEANS said they'd be modified. SENATOR GREEN questioned whether the language does that because the language talks about secondary students who do not have daily access to a school. She added, "I recognize many school districts and sites that we clearly pay a lot of money to for schools, which, to me, is inconsistent." MR. JEANS said they modeled the language after the existing program just to keep it simple. "All we're trying to do is expand an existing program to the kids that do have daily access that are electing, by choice, to go to these boarding programs. To provide those boarding programs with some kind of state support to offset the residential cost." CHAIR DYSON referred to line three of the sponsor statement and asked for an explanation of the statement, "...a student would not have to pass the current entrance standards." MR. JEANS reiterated that under current regulations, for a student to qualify for the program, they cannot have daily access to a secondary program. CHAIR DYSON turned to Ms. Lindster and said that with this significant expansion of the program, he would have expected that she and the sponsor would have limited qualification to just those students that come from communities that don't have a secondary school and/or where there was a school that was failing under the No Child Left Behind Act and an alternative was required. "Did you consider that?" he asked. MR. JEANS pointed to Mountain Village to provide an explanation. The community does offer a K-12 program so, under current regulations, DEED can't provide Nenana with any state support to help with the residential costs for the Mountain Village kids that are attending school in Nenana. That's what this legislation is trying to do, he said. The Mountain Village kids that have elected to attend secondary school in Nenana have done so because they believe the program in Nenana has something to offer them that they can't get in Mountain Village. CHAIR DYSON commented that he covered that previously. MR. JEANS continued saying that if they limited eligibility to those students that don't have daily access to a secondary program then there would be no need for this legislation because current regulation already covers that. CHAIR DYSON asked if, under this bill or current legislation, the state is required to offer a boarding school alternative to students that attend a school that is failing to make progress under the No Child Left Behind Act. MR. JEANS replied that within the capacity of the boarding school to accept the students, if the parents elected to go there during the pilot program, this legislation allows for the state to reimburse monthly boarding costs and one roundtrip airfare. CHAIR DYSON questioned whether current legislation allowed that or not. MR. JEANS replied, "Under our current regulations we cannot." CHAIR DYSON encouraged the sponsor and Mr. Jeans to tighten the requirements to those schools that aren't making adequate yearly progress before the Finance Committee hearing. Another alternative would be to establish some criteria for schools that can't offer students very much because they're too small. He questioned what happens when students decide to move to a boarding school after the school year begins and the ADM has been counted because the receiving school typically wouldn't be reimbursed for the additional student(s). MR. JEANS agreed that would be the case under this program as well, but the programs are already operating at capacity so there probably wouldn't be room for a student that wasn't enrolled at the beginning of the year. CHAIR DYSON called a brief at ease then reconvened the meeting. SENATOR GREEN asked how the parents participate. MR. JEANS said it varies with the program, but in Nenana some parents move to help with the student(s). He wasn't sure about parent participation in Galena. SENATOR GREEN asked how much each parent is expected to pay. MR. JEANS told her it varies by community and they don't track that information. SENATOR GUESS suggested amending the stipend language to make it more clear because it really is specific in the regulations. She then pointed out that it doesn't say this is a pilot project and the program will be assessed in five years to look for certain broad outcomes. CHAIR DYSON announced that the bill would likely move from the committee that day and he suspected that anyone that was interested in testifying would have an opportunity to do so in the Finance Committee. He asked whether there was anyone who specifically wanted or needed to testify that day. FLOYD BROOKS testified via teleconference to say he is a single parent of three students that have the opportunity to attend school in Nenana. He spoke in strong support of the program. "In supporting HB 425 everyone wins," he said. LOTTIE YATES testified via teleconference to say that small schools are limited in terms of what they are able to offer students. She said the quality of education in Nenana is high and she urged support for HB 425. TAPE 04-25, SIDE B AGNES DAVIS testified via teleconference to express support for HB 425. SENATOR WILKEN asked Mr. Jeans if it is correct that a student from Mountain Village that is attending the school in Nenana is counted "in Nenana as just a normal student that is run through the formula." MR. JEANS said that's correct. SENATOR WILKEN then said, "We would be able to go to the ADM funding for the school district for Nenana to see what that child costs us in school - in the learning center in Nenana." MR. JEANS started to reply. SENATOR WILKEN added, "It's transparent as to whether it's a boarding school or not." MR. JEANS said yes. There were no further questions. CHAIR DYSON asked for the will of the committee. SENATOR WILKEN motioned to report CSHB 425(EDU) from committee with individual recommendations and the attached fiscal note. There being no objection, it was so ordered.
Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
---|