Education Issues - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

View by Category
About This Presentation

Education Issues


Title: Education Funding and the FY2012 Budget Author: drigsby Last modified by: Samantha Staebell Created Date: 1/5/2012 6:33:53 PM Document presentation format – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:68
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 42
Provided by: drig153


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Education Issues

Education Issues the FY2013 Budget
  • VSBA Annual Legislative Conference

Deborah Rigsby, Director, Federal
Legislation National School Boards Association
Key Points
  • FY2013 Budget Process
  • Budget Control Act of 2011
  • Pending Legislation
  • Talking Points to Congress

(No Transcript)
Congressional Budget Process
  • February 14 President submits budget request to
  • February 15 Congressional Budget Office submits
    reports to House Senate Budget Committees
  • March 19 -- Authorizing committees submit views
    and estimates to Budget Committees
  • April 1 Senate Budget Committee reports
    concurrent resolution on the budget

Congressional Budget Process
  • April 15 Congress completes action on budget
  • May 15 Annual appropriations bills may be
    considered in the House
  • June 10 House Appropriations Committee reports
    last annual funding bill
  • June 15 Congress completes action on
    reconciliation legislation
  • June 30 House completes action on annual
    appropriations bills
  • October 1 Fiscal year begins

Budget Control Act of 2011
  • Automatic triggers that would reduce overall
    spending by 1.2 trillion, spread evenly over the
    fiscal years 2013 through 2021
  • Half of the 1.2 trillion would come from defense
    spending and half from non-defense programs
    through a process called budget sequestration.
  • Process could reportedly cut funding for
    education programs by an more than 3.5 billion,
    or about 7.8 percent.
  • Source Congressional Budget Office

Budget Control Act
  • Triggered budget cuts would begin in FY2013,
    during the 2012-13 school year.
  • Talking Point to Congress
  • Ensure that the Budget Control Act cuts do not
    affect advance appropriations (Title I, special
    education, career and technical education) to
    school districts since they would begin in the
    middle of the 2012-13 school year.

  • FY 13 fixed percentage across-the-board cuts.
  • CBO Projection 7.8 cut to all non-exempt
    domestic programs.
  • Would be a cut of 3.5 billion to education
    programs (based on FY 12 level).
  • CBPP projects 9.1 4.1 billion ED cut.
  • Pell grants exempt in first year.
  • FY 14-21 will not be ACB cut further lowers
    discretionary caps
  • Squeezes education

  • FY 2012
  • Consolidated Appropriations Bill
  • Extends funding to 9/30/12
  • Across the board cut of .189
  • FY 2013
  • Presidents budget 2/6/12
  • Budget Control Act - 10 year plan

FY2012 Appropriations
State Revenues/Education Aid
  • States general expenditures were 21 billion
    less than in 2008, the year before the recession.
  • 18 states made mid-year FY2011 reductions to K-12
    education 12 states reduced K-12 general
    assistance in FY2012.
  • Reduction in federal funds compounds fiscal
    Fiscal Survey of States, Fall 2011

(No Transcript)
Virginia Funding for Major K-12 Programs
  • Regular Appropriations for Virginia under Title
    I, IDEA, Teacher Quality total about 574.5
  • Remaining special funding for Virginia
  • A. Stimulus (5.6 million of 251 million)
  • Stabilization funds 172 of 983.9 million
  • Title I 147,000 of 165.3 million
  • IDEA 769,294 of 281.4 million
  • SIG 36.1 million of 50.6 million
  • B. Jobs Fund 155.4 million of 253.2 million

Current State Spending Pressures
  • Winding down of stimulus funding
  • Medicaid payments
  • Cost of new health care law
  • Prisons
  • Restoration of rainy day funds

Title I
  • Serves an estimated 20 million students in more
    than 90 percent of school districts
  • Title I schoolwide programs operate in an
    estimated 35,000 schools
  • Extended school day programs, professional
    development, parental involvement, preschool

Title I Talking Point
  • Title I investments must be sustained in order to
    support the increased demand.  More students are
    eligible and need Title I services because of the
    economy, which has added more students to the
    national poverty count, creating a greater need
    for additional resources.

  • Current funding level is roughly less than 17
    percent of what Congress promised (or less than
    one-half of what Congress promised under the
    Individuals With Disabilities Education Act).
  • Below the 40 of the National Average Per Pupil
    Expenditure (estimated at 10,154 for the 2009-10
    school year).

IDEA Full Funding Act
  • S. 1403 sponsored by Senator Harkin
  • Would reauthorize funding levels for IDEA through
    FY2021 to reach the full funding level of the
    federal share (40 of the excess cost per
    student) 35.3 billion.

School Infrastructure
  • FAST Act (S. 1597) Fix Americas Schools Today
    Act would provide 25 billion in grants for
    school repairs and renovation.
  • Estimated that a school could save up to 100,000
    per year in maintenance costs enough for two
    teachers, 200 more computers, or 5,000 textbooks,
    according to Sen. Sherrod Brown.

School Infrastructure
  • The Rehabilitation of Historic Schools Act (S.
    1685) would permit corporations and other private
    entities to benefit from a tax credit when
    investing in the rehabilitation of an older
    school building.
  • Pursuant to the partnership developed by a school
    board and a participating private entity,
    allowing local governments to use the historic
    building rehabilitation tax credit.
  • Sponsored by Sens. Jim Webb and Mark
  • Warner and Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia.

School Bonds
  • Urge Congress to pass the Rebuilding Americas
    Schools Act S. 796 and H.R. 2394
  • Would extend Qualified School Construction Bonds
    (QSCBs) Qualified Zone Academy Bonds (QZABs)
  • QSCBs provided 22 billion in school construction
    bond authority for 2009 2010.
  • QZABs provided 2.8 billion in bond authority
    during 2009-2010.

Talking Point
  • We know that education is going to be the
    currency of the 21st Century. Theres been
    almost no discussion of that on either side about
    what we need to do to raise the level of
    education so everyone will have the skill set to
    compete in that hyperconnective world that you
  • --Tom Brokaw, Meet
    the Press, December 25, 2011

Reauthorization of ESEA
  • Policy Context
  • NCLB A standards and data driven accountability
    system containing flaws that are having an
    increasingly negative impact
  • EDs Principles for School Reform Four
    priorities to drive the delivery system within
    the NCLB framework
  • Race to the Top
  • ESEA Reauthorization Blueprint
  • NCLB Regulatory Relief Program to continue the
    NCLB framework plus adding detail to the four
    principles but waives ten NCLBs flaws for states
    that have approved plans

ESEA Reauthorization
  • Policy Context
  • Senate Bill With variations, generally follows
    EDs overall approachincluding the federal level
    retaining specific requirements and approval of
    the states accountability systemplus adding
    some new requirements and other programming

ESEA Reauthorization
  • Policy Context
  • House Bill Follows the pattern except removes
    many specific requirements and elements to be
    approved in the state planplus consolidating
    some programs, putting constraints on federal
    regulatory authority, and limiting funding

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Similar achievement/accountability approach as
    EDs waiver program
  • Adopting college and career ready standards
    (12/2013)/Implement assessments (2015-16 school
  • Replace existing AMOs proficiency requirements
    for all students/subgroups by 2014 with new
    achievement goals set by the state
  • Replace identification/intervention for all
    schools not making AYP for any of its subgroups
    with a focus on lowest performing (EDs priority
    schools) and highest achievement gap (EDs focus

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Accountability System
  • State develops by 2013-14 School Year
  • Covers all schools
  • Requires continuous improvement
  • Indentifies and supports weak schools
  • Builds local capacity
  • Measuring growth as an option
  • Requires equitable distribution of teachers
  • Requires more complex system of parental

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Interventions for Persistently Low Performing
    Schools (EDs Priority Schools)
  • 5 lowest performing high schools including grad
    rates/ lowest 5 of all other schools
  • Seven turn-around models, including a state
    option if approved by ED
  • Must replace principal if at an identified school
    for more than 2 years
  • State identifies schools by 2013-14 school year/
    5year plan required for these schools

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Interventions for Persistently Low Performing
    Schools (cont)
  • Transformation- Staff Reapplies
  • Strategic Staffing-Principal Appoints Teacher
    Leadership Team 
  • Turnaround-At Least 35 of Teachers Replaced
  • Whole School Reform- Reform Developer Used
  • Restart-Charter or Magnet School
  • School Closure-Students Attend Higher
    Performing School
  • State Option-State Designed Strategy Approved
    by ED
  • --------------------------------------------------
  • Must Also Replace Principal If At School For
    More Than Two Years   

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Interventions for Achievement Gap Schools
  • The 5 of high schools with states largest gap
    among subgroups within their school or state
    overallincluding lowest graduation rate
  • The 5 of other schools with largest gap among
  • Interventions required but no specific model
  • State identifies by 2013-14 school year

Students with Most Serious Cognitive Disabilities
  • Can provide alternative achievement standards for
    the individual if aligned with content standards
  • Can provide alternative assessments if aligned
    with alternative achievement standards
  • Subject by subject
  • Parent involvement
  • Tied to general curriculum
  • Limit 1 of students statewide

Senate ESEA Bill
  • Other Select Provisions
  • Family engagement plans/school compacts
  • Highly Qualified Teachers continued but not for
    special-ed teachers of multiple subjects
  • Comparability of services based on budget of each
    school (2015-16 School Year)
  • Coordination requirements for early-ed programs
    involving children in Head Start or
    McKinney-Vento Homeless programs

Senate BillSelect Provisions
  • Other Programs
  • English Language Learners and Immigrant Students
  • Successful, Safe, and Healthy Students
  • Race to the Top
  • Investing In Innovation (i3)
  • Public Charter Schools
  • Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)

ESEA House Action
  • H.R. 1891Eliminates 42 smaller federal programs
  • H.R. 2218Replaces existing Charter School
    Program with a focus on creating new charters
    through a new 300 million competition grant
  • H.R. 2245Provides 100 flexibility to
    transferring funds among ESEA programs
  • Draft bills on accountability and teaching

House Draft Bills High Points
  • Funding focused on Title I/Ell students and
    professional development
  • Broad state discretion in developing student
    achievement plan
  • Does not address (and discontinues) programs
    targeted to specific curriculum areas like
  • Technology/ Literacy/Stem
  • Reduce federal footprint Limits authority of ED

House Bill
  • Expands state/local discretion
  • Standards
  • No common core or university validation
  • Science not required
  • Assessment
  • Science not required
  • Individual proficiency and Growth must be factors
  • Accountability
  • Growth may be a factor plus other indicators
    indentified by state
  • No specific number/percent of schools identified
  • No specific interventions

State Plan
  • State has six years to develop new
    standards/assessment/accountability system
  • ED can only turn plan down if it doesnt meet
    general requirementsbut plan must ensure that
    the accountability system will result in all
    students being prepared for college or workplace
    without remediation
  • ED specifically prohibited from mandating or
    coercing any element of standard/

Teacher Provisions
  • Highly Qualified Teacher requirement eliminated
  • Professional development programs restyled into
    two pots
  • Formula funds for general professional
    development use, provided that the school
    district has three or more rating tiers in a
    teacher evaluation system using a) student
    performance as a significant factor and b)
    multiple measures to evaluatewith use of the
    evaluation for personnel decisions
  • Competitive grantsAlternative certification/
    performance pay, retention strategies,
    professional development

Funding Problems
  • Sets next years funding at FY 2012 levels and
    caps subsequent years to CPI (i.e., reduces real
    service levels over time)
  • Eliminates maintenance of effort requirements for
    states and counties/cities that fund education,
    (i.e. eliminates conditioning federal funding to
    these government entities continuing to fund
    education at the previous years levels or higher)

Key Reauthorization Questions
  • How large and broad should the federal role be?
  • How much control should the federal government
  • How much discretion should ED have?
  • Will the federal dollars match the federal

Deborah Rigsby Director, Federal
Legislation National School Boards
Association 703-838-6722