|BILL AS INTRODUCED||2007-2008|
Introduced by Senator Collins of Franklin District
Subject: Education; special education; high spending districts
Statement of purpose: This bill proposes to increase fiscal oversight of school districts with high special education spending.
AN ACT RELATING TO FISCAL REVIEW OF HIGH SPENDING DISTRICTS AND SPECIAL EDUCATION
It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Vermont:
Sec. 1. 16 V.S.A. § 2974 is amended to read:
2974. SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM; FISCAL REVIEW
PANEL OF HIGH
(a) Annually, the commissioner shall report on:
(1) special education expenditures by school districts;
(2) the rate of growth or decrease in special education costs, including the identity of high and low spending districts;
(3) outcomes for special education students;
(4) the availability of special education staff;
consistency of special education program implementation statewide;
(6) the status of the education support systems in school districts; and
(7) a statewide summary of the the special education student count, including:
(A) the percentage of the total average daily membership represented by special education students statewide and by school district;
(B) the percentage of special education students by disability category; and
(C) the percentage of special education students by in‑district placement, day placement, and residential placement.
commissioner shall review high spending districts to determine Annually,
but no later than October 1, the commissioner shall notify high spending
districts that they have been designated as such. Each designated district
shall respond within 60 days with an explanation of its spending to address
(1) costs could be decreased while still providing needed special education services;
(2) the district made reasonable efforts to provide, purchase, or contract for goods or services that are the most reasonably priced yet appropriate for its students;
district reported special education expenditures appropriately;
(4) all expenditures identified as special education expenditures were properly attributed to eligible students and the services for which the expenditures were made were included in the students’ individualized education plans;
(5) the district’s special education staff‑to‑child count ratios were higher than the state average, including a breakdown of ratios by staffing categories;
(6) the number of students in more restrictive environments such as day programs and residential placements was above the state average of special education students in those placements and, if so, information about the categories of disabilities for the students in such placements;
(7) the district was in compliance with section 2901 of this title; and
(8) if the district’s proportion of its average daily membership who are enrolled in special education exceeds 20 percent of the statewide average, any unusual community characteristics contributed to this condition.
(c) The commissioner shall review low spending districts to determine the reasons for their spending patterns and whether those districts used cost‑effective strategies appropriate to replicate in other districts.
(d) For the purposes of this section, a “high spending district” is a school district that, in the previous school year, spent at least 20 percent more than the statewide average of special education eligible costs per average daily membership. Also for the purposes of this section, a “low spending district” is a school district that, in the previous school year, spent no more than 80 percent of the statewide average of special education eligible costs per average daily membership.
the purpose of advising the commissioner and providing technical assistance to
school districts, the state board shall appoint a fiscal review panel of seven
people who have expertise in the areas of data collection and finance, and in
the fields of special education, business or health and human services. The panel,
at the request of a district school board, shall work with the department of
education to review spending patterns and provision of special education
services in the district and provide advice to the school board and staff
concerning cost control mechanisms and cost‑effective practices. In
addition, the panel shall make recommendations on what types of data to collect
for purposes of the annual report required under subsection (a) of this
section, and how the data should be analyzed. If
after a review of a high spending district’s explanation, the commissioner
finds that the explanation is not satisfactory, the commissioner shall conduct
a performance review to include one or more of the following:
(1) a review of the district’s special education student count patterns over time;
(2) a review of the district’s compliance with section 2901 of this title and any unusual community characteristics that exist;
(3) an on‑site review to examine a sample of special education student records and related financial and business records;
(4) a review of the district’s compliance with federal and state requirements to provide a free appropriate public education to eligible students; and
(5) a review of other factors.
(f) Within 60 days of completing the performance review, the commissioner shall notify the district in writing of his or her findings and whether the results of the performance review are satisfactory or not satisfactory. If the results of the performance review are not satisfactory to the commissioner, the commissioner, in consultation with the school district, shall develop a remediation plan. The district shall have two years to make progress on the remediation plan. At the conclusion of the two years or earlier, the district shall report its progress on the remediation plan. Within 30 days of receipt of the district’s report of progress, the commissioner shall notify the district that its progress is either satisfactory or not satisfactory. If the district fails to make satisfactory progress, the commissioner shall notify the district that it will be subject to a reduction in the ensuing school year of up to 50 percent of its special education expenditures reimbursement pursuant to section 2963 of this title. If the district continues to fail to make satisfactory progress beyond the first year of reduction, the reduction of up to 50 percent of the special education expenditures reimbursement shall continue for every year until progress is made to the satisfaction of the commissioner.
The Vermont General Assembly
115 State Street