|
|
|
CASE ARRA
School Districts’ Perspectives on the Economic Stimulus Package: Teaching Jobs Saved in 2009-10 But Teacher Layoffs Loom for Next School YearToday, the Center on Education Policy released the results from a spring of 2010 survey of a nationally representative sample of school districts. The purpose of the survey was to learn about districts’ fiscal situation and how American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds have impacted them over the last year. CEP found that while the federal funds helped districts save or create teaching jobs and stabilize budgets, most districts expected to layoff teachers in the 2010-11 school year. The report also addresses districts’ efforts to carryout ARRA’s four reform areas, district uses of State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and supplemental Title I and IDEA funds, and problems faced by districts in implementing ARRA. School Districts’ Perspectives on the Economic Stimulus Package: Teaching Jobs Saved in 2009-10 But Teacher Layoffs Loom for Next School Year is posted on the CEP Web site (www.cep-dc.org) under “What’s New” and can be downloaded free-of-charge. Click Here to view the PDF Document On The intent of this Policy/Legislation update is to provide the members with the following information:
1) The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act includes almost 100 billion dollars earmarked for Education, which includes: Ø $13 billion for Title I, Ø $12.2 billion for IDEA, Ø $53.6 billion for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Ø $5 billion for Early Childhood education. Ø $500 million for Part C, infants and families The Department of Education (DOE) has stated
that it is working to distribute funds quickly through a streamlined
application process that also requires "strong commitments on the
front end and even stronger proof on the back end that states are
not only putting new dollars into the classroom but are making
meaningful and measurable progress toward the reform goals" of the
ARRA. They seem to be
indicating that the fund distribution will include the use of
existing state formulas and an application process that requires a
number of assurances that states and local agencies meet their
projected expectations.
In addition, the Recovery.gov web site (http://www.recovery.gov/) is now live. The mission of this site is three-fold: education (explain the ARRA), transparency (show how, when, and where ARRA money is spent), and accountability (furnish data that will allow citizens to evaluate the act's progress and provide feedback). There are already projections -- based on ARRA language -- of the effect on jobs state-by-state.
CASE is continuing to work with CEC and the Department of Education (DOE) to facilitate sharing information received to questions submitted to the Department. It is important that members take guidance and direction from their SEA until final guidance on allocations and other implementation aspects of the ARRA is rendered from USDOE, which is expected out during the week of February 23. 2) Clarification and historical information on supplanting as it relates to IDEA (Special thanks to Dr. Jonathan McIntire for his contributions to this historical focus on supplanting as it relates to IDEA.) Public education is constitutionally established as a state and local government function and is not a priority of the federal government. State legislatures and local communities have long had the responsibility of providing a public education system and funding it adequately. This includes the education of all students regardless of their race, sex, economic status, culture, or disability. The federal government has over time encouraged and helped state and local governments to maintain a high standard of public education realizing the strength of our nation depends in part upon the knowledge and skill of our people. Title 1 has been used to help state and local governments ensure high quality education for our nation’s children of poverty while Title III focuses upon ensuring our nation’s students who are non-English speaking receive the intensive and specialized instruction necessary to effectively learn within our public education system. Title VI has worked to ensure students of different races were not discriminated against in their full access to and benefit from public education and Title IX has done the same for women, especially as it relates to equitable access to athletics, science and mathematics instruction and other developmental activities beyond reading, writing and arithmetic. Each of these provisions has been designed to ensure that all people within our nation are treated equally in their access to learning; that no one group is discriminated and limited in their capacity. Education is a civil right for all within our society. The federal special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), was passed in 1975 and implemented in 1977 as a funding bill. IDEA federal funds have always been designed to “supplement” state and local funds used in providing special education services for students with disabilities, in addition to the educational funds provided for all students. Those funds were never intended to supplant what state and local governments must provide to ensure a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) for its students with disabilities. In fact, regulatory provisions were carefully placed within the IDEA at its inception specifically to prevent state and local governments from using federal funds to supplant their necessary local investment of their students with disabilities. It has not historically been permissible for states and local education agencies to use federal special education dollars they receive to supplant their own investment in the education of students with disabilities. Over the years, state and local governments
have struggled with having adequate funding for public education.
The current status of the economy has significantly compounded this
issue and although we see some potential relief reflected in the
substantial funds earmarked in the ARRA, there continues to be
concern for the long term. Since education is primarily funded
through state and local taxes, our current loss in revenue due to
the economic downturn suggests a possible tax increase in the near
future. All of this makes it inevitable that state and
local education agencies will want the federal IDEA funds earmarked
in the ARRA to be available to address to some extent their severe
revenue deficits.
States and local school districts are increasingly using their
limited federal special education funds to pay for services they
previously have funded on their own. The Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE) believes it is important to remind state and local governments of their need to equitably fund all components of their education systems. As educational services are negatively impacted by revenue shortfalls, CASE continues to promote an assurance at the local levels that students with disabilities are financially supported in equivalent proportions to their non-disabled peers. Given the current information on the additional IDEA funds coming to SEAs and LEAs through ARRA, the question on supplanting has been raised many times over the past several weeks. The questions are two fold, with the first focusing on whether it will be permissible to supplant and under what conditions and secondly, whether that is a fair and appropriate use of IDEA funds. The reality is that education and special education has continued to cost more to local and state agencies while the revenues have continued to decrease, putting an even greater burden on local school districts and forcing decisions on priorities and limitations despite the rising costs of educating all students. At the same time, CASE has advocated and continues to support increases in federal special education funds provided to state and local governments through the ARRA. This may include using these “increased ARRA IDEA funds” to help safeguard students with disabilities from losing the incredible gains achieved in their access to and benefit from public education. Students with disabilities must continue to be a major focus of state and local governments in their provision of a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) and to access funds that support innovation, additional research-based strategies and supports that continue to benefit students with disabilities and afford them greater opportunities to achieve educational gains. 3)
The following are a summary of many of the questions
developed through · What will be the regulations on the use of the money- specifically supplanting, MOE, 15% for general education, pre-school fund regulations? · Are there state examples of effective braiding of funds to strategically maximize resources and meet the needs of all students in a state/district? · Will portions of the funds be retained at the State level? · Will any of the stimulus funds be used to target expediting the development at SEA and LEA levels of Response to Intervention; SEA/LEA efforts to develop and keep "highly qualified" special education teachers; and the further integration of severely disabled students within the general educational curriculum and educational settings? · Will States be allowed to pull off larger amounts for set aside for creative programs statewide? · Will we still be able to use 15% of the amount for Early Intervening Services (EIS)? · Will there be a % of funds designated as RTI funds for services delivered for students on level 3 (intense individual) targeted assistance? · Will there be a percentage of funds set for preschool and will it address general preschool population or identified children with disabilities? · What protections are there to insure that funds go directly to the education of students with disabilities? · Will these additional dollars be subject to the 15% set aside for disproportionality requirements for systems that are considered disproportionate? · Can these funds be used to purchase buses or other modes of transporting students with disabilities?
·
Will any of the stimulus funds be
targeted specifically at the development of appropriate education
services for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder, including the
possible further development of SEA and LEA in-school · Will the federal formula used for allocation be applied to the distribution of funds? · How will the funds be allocated-supplementary flow-through or special allocation? · Will regulations regarding supplanting be waived during this time of crisis to allow flexibility including for states which recently cut funds due to financial crisis? · How will the issue of supplanting be addressed under the Stimulus Plan? · How will the Federal DOE define and monitor the supplanting issue within SEAs and LEAs and what if, any, guidelines will be developed that provide flexibility to states and local districts? · Will the current regulations on supplanting and maintenance of effort be modified to permit assisting districts with utilize the funds to maintain current staffing patterns? · What consequence, if any, would be imposed on the states or districts found to be supplanting? · Can the DOE clarify the definition and interpretation of supplanting so that states and districts will understand the scope of flexibility? · Will there be additional flexibility for allowable costs as restricted by IDEA? · Will carry over be allowed and with what guidelines and flexibility? · Will States be allowed to modify various accounting procedures
o
maximum carry over (GA is currently
25% of grant unless an
o
maintenance of effort
issues; and o guidelines about supplanting and hiring staff with the additional dollars. · Will these dollars roll into the current IDEA grants or be a separate pot? · When will the IDEA funds be allocated-FY 09, 10 or 11?
·
When can we anticipate accessing
these funds? Will it be in time to impact the next fiscal
budget ( · What is the plan for two years out after the ARRA funds have been allocated? What is the plan to assist districts in the transition to accommodate for the loss of this money or will the IDEA funding remain constant since it is a step towards the original commitment through IDEA of federal government assistance for serving children with disabilities?
·
Will the · Will there be limitation on the amount of carryover? If so will the “new” money be considered our allocation and thus our 25% carryover would be determined using a higher allocation figure or will this be referred to in some other term that will not be an “allocation” and thus we will not be able to carry over a larger amount? · Assuming it is a temporary solution for the next few years, how does MOE come in to affect when the money has been distributed? · Would the stimulus packet funds be open to reallocation should the current fiscal crisis continue over time? · Will the ARRA funds be disbursed in a separate allocation? · Will Maintenance of Effort be maintained at the 07 school year as the required comparison year? · Will the percentage stay at this level or reverse after 2 years? In summary, this is an exciting, historic period in our country and for education in the midst of a serious economic crisis. While we are faced with many significant financial challenges, the increase of billions of dollars earmarked for many different facets of education provides us with opportunities to address many of the areas we have been struggling with for several years. Through collaborative efforts with the DOE and other organizations, discussions and further guidance for state and local appropriations, we will continue to keep our focus on improving the outcomes for students with disabilities by collaboratively setting priorities and accessing available funds that will address the needs and increased expectations for all students. 4.
Economic Recovery Resources
Document Downloads - PDF
Get information on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009:
Reminder: The Department has released initial guidance for:
CEC is pleased to provide you with a brand-new resource: the
Council for Exceptional Children’s Questions & Answers: How the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Impacts Special
Education and Early Intervention.
Available online, this Q&A summarizes the portions of ARRA that
CEC believes will be of particular interest to its members.
Also known as the economic stimulus package, ARRA
more than doubles current federal funding for
special education and early intervention programs that CEC and its
members have long advocated for. This legislation is the culmination
of decades of advocacy and leadership by CEC and its members in
collaboration with the education and disability communities. CEC
thanks its members for over 30 years of strategic, focused advocacy!
In addition, CEC is collecting feedback on how ARRA has impacted
you, your school/early intervention program, and the children and
youth you serve. By completing CEC’s
short survey you will help us sustain this historic investment
in special education and early intervention.
Because this is an evolving process, CEC will provide you with new
information as it becomes available.
The on-demand presentation of Economic Stimulus & Powering Through the Recession is now available. In this one-hour webinar, our expert panel discusses guidelines recently released by the U.S. Department of Education relating to President Barack Obama’s stimulus plan, and how school districts can power their way through the recession. Presenters Included: Please use the URL below to access the Webinar. http://w.on24.com/r.htm?e=134093&s=1&k=5391CF710026E8CEB2E0686BDAEFCA05 Also, view a complete list of edweek.org's upcoming and archived Webinars. Cheers Webinar sponsored by:
|
|
|
ARRA
The Council of Administrators of Special Education, Inc.
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
