EPP Proposal

SED Response

1) Eliminate all wealth factors or wealth eligibility in the calculations for student need (Tier 2 and Tier 3 of Flex Aid currently have these wealth calculations); and 2) include a proposal to create a commission made up of education finance experts to revise the foundation formula at regular three-or five-year intervals.

• The Regents believe that school district fiscal capacity, or as you term it, wealth, is an essential feature in aid distribution.  This represents the ability of a district to raise revenues locally.  Despite this, the Regents have recognized the need for stability in school districts with rapidly increasing property values such as has occurred downstate this year and last.  As a result, they have used smoothing features, such as allowing districts to use the current year measure or the average of two or more years.  This will be addressed in this year’s proposal as well.  The Regents do not use a tier approach in the Foundation Aid proposal.  The tier approach was part of the Flex Aid put in place by the Governor and Legislature.
• The Regents have recommended a new study on the cost of an adequate education every three years.

The proposal should be accompanied by an accountability proposal that allays the fears of parents and advocates that special education service levels will be reduced, such as making staffing levels public.

The Regents fully agree on the need for solid accountability in this area.  For this reason, results for students with disabilities are included in the State’s school accountability system.  In addition, accountability recommendations advanced in this year’s budget request ask for additional staff, including special education quality assurance staff, audit staff and additional staff for academic intervention teams to increase monitoring and assistance to high need school districts for both general and special education programs.  The Department has complied with Federal requirements for NCLB to provide accountability for students with disabilities as a separate reporting category.  The Department is developing a state plan to comply with the newly reauthorized federal IDEA legislation that requires detailed accountability reporting and specific performance targets for 20 outcome measures.

EPP Proposal

SED Response

No plan for improving outcomes of students with disabilities.

Improving outcomes for students with disabilities is a core mission of the VESID office.  Students with disabilities have been a subgroup for the NCLB accountability process and VESID staff have worked with low performing schools to improve results.  In addition, the newly authorized IDEA legislation has new requirements for state performance plans and annual performance reports.  As indicated above, the state performance plan is designed to track performance and drive improved outcomes for students with disabilities. We are working on our State performance plan, which will be submitted to the federal government in December.

Protocols need to be developed for SDIS to capture the wide variety of program models that many students, especially in high-need districts, are subjected to and, just as important, the limited duration of many of these programs.

The unique student identifier will open the door to countless assessments of offerings and results in high need school districts, which will inform public policy.  We are currently working to reestablish an Education Finance Research Consortium to do some of this work.

EPP continues to be confused by the statement that “…We will be able to measure the benefit of using smaller class sizes with certain groups of students…. Are the Regents seeking to raise the average class sizes in the rest of the state?

No.  Just to evaluate what works and adjust public policy accordingly.  The point of that example is that billions of dollars are often spent without the benefit of precise information on the benefits for NYS schools.

The Educational Priorities Panel supports providing BOCES funding to the NYC school district.

Actually, BOCES Aid would go the Big 4 city school districts, not NYC.  Because of its size, the Regents recommend comparable funding be provided to NYC for regional services without BOCES.  The aid stream would be an enhanced Special Services Aid.

The Educational Priorities Panel strongly supports expanding preschool education.  What is the student achievement profile of the 8 percent of the state’s school districts that do not offer full-day kindergarten?

Mostly low need school districts with high student achievement.

What are the consequences for mandating attendance in kindergarten for student suspensions?  If attendance is mandatory, will suspensions require alternative placements of these young children?

It’s already required for school districts to follow attendance policies if a student is enrolled in a pre-k program.  Suspension is a last resort.  Our data do not support that this is a large problem.  CBOs make money by enrolling students so have an incentive to keep them, not suspend them.

EPP Proposal

SED Response

Does the Regents recommendation for a separate foundation-like aid formula for pre-kindergarten include funding for school bus transportation and Building Aid?

Yes.

There needs to be more oversight over early childhood education.

We agree.  There needs to be much more oversight of the quality of early childhood programs.  Much of SED’s efforts are focused on quality (technical assistance, regional networks, etc.).  However, to raise quality we will also need to get administrators to supervise more and provide more staff development for early childhood teachers.

EPP favors requiring all school districts to offer full-day kindergarten, but we are opposed to making attendance mandatory in this grade.

We would like to hear more about why you are opposed.

Simplified cost allowance for state Building Aid. Our assumption is that the proposed formula is for new construction projects, not capital repair projects.  Correct?

Correct.

Do the Regents recommend elimination of the 3 percent bump up for high need school districts?  Elimination of enhanced cost allowances for dense urban areas?

No.  They recommend continuation of these two features.