House Status:
Senate Status:
Senate Status:
Minutes for SB173 - Committee on Education
Short Title
Extending the high-density at-risk student weighting, requiring certain transfers to the at-risk fund of a school district and establishing requirements for school district at-risk fund expenditures and for identification of students eligible to receive at-risk programs and services.
Minutes Content for Thu, Feb 18, 2021
The Chair opened the hearing on SB173, explaining this bill is very similar to a bill last year's Committee worked on extensively. There is no opponent testimony.
Tamera Lawrence, Assistant Revisor, Office of the Revisor of Statute, gave a comprehensive overview of the bill. (Attachment 1)
Heidi Zimmerman, Principal Auditor, Legislative Post Audit (LPA), gave neutral testimony explaining how this bill could solve some of the recommendations made by LPA for the at-risk programs and practices. Some of the issues reported were:
- Most of the at-risk funding reviewed was spent on teachers and programs that serve all students rather than focusing on at-risk students.
- Many of the programs Districts reported using did not have strong research finding them to be effective.
- Most of the at-risk practices approved by the Kansas State Board of Education (KSDE) did not target at-risk students and were not clearly evidence based.
- KSDE's management of the approved at-risk programs reduced effective oversight and made it more difficult for Districts to plan.
- In the audit, it was noted that a sunset provision in state law created a conflict with other provisions in law.
LPA recommended the Department establish a process to determine if any identified programs and practices are evidence-based and targeted for at-risk students and the Board should more thoroughly oversee the process for identifying at-risk programs and practices. Discussion followed and the Chair asked the Auditor to work with the Revisor on an amendment to resolve the conflict in regards to the sunset date. (Attachment 2)
G. A. Buie, Executive Director, USA-Kansas and Kansas School Superintendents Association, stood in support stating high-density at-risk funding is vital to the growth and safety of many individual students in Kansas schools.
Although there are a number of successful strategies for working with at-risk students, the challenge exists to uncover the root of the issue. Often the path leads back to social, emotional, or learning challenges that directly or indirectly interferes with a student's success in school. For students living in homes with uncertainties, where basic safety needs are unmet, financial concerns, and/or even abuse, a student's social and emotional needs must be met before true learning can occur.
It is difficult to support these social and emotional elements in the traditional at-risk programs. They require continued interventions that can often change from month to month, additional staff such as counselors, social workers, psychologists, and others skilled to access non-academic resources. (Attachment 3)
Mark Desetti, Legislative and Political Advocacy, Kansas National Education Association, reminded the Committee of the work done on a similar bill last year and how the Chair directed him and Mike O'Neal to make recommendations they could both agree on. Mark Tallman, Kansas Association of School Boards, Jim Porter, Kansas State Board of Education, Dodie Wellshear also collaborate on the recommendations. Those are embedded in this bill.
Included is a restriction on spending at-risk dollars by requiring the use of a set of research-based programs identified by the State Board and listed on the Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE) website. This bill allows school districts to try new ideas that have not yet been reviewed and approved in an effort to find new and creative ways to meet student needs for up to three years.
The team felt it was critically important that teachers get appropriate training in the implementation of at-risk programs therefore the bill allows for at-risk funding to provide professional development related to such implementation.
This bill codifies the criteria used by Districts in determining which students participate in approved at-risk education programs with the addition of dyslexia. The team supported the development of the Dyslexia Task Force, participated in the task force discussions, and supports the recommendations of the task force. (Attachment 4)
Mike O'Neal, Kansas Policy Institute, appeared in support of this bill. In recent legislative sessions, the Kansas Legislature has gone to great effort in attempting to address the problems identified by the Kansas Supreme Court in Gannon and as confirmed by KSDE's own student performance statistics. In spite of unprecedented amounts of additional legislatively approved funding for K-12, outcomes for students identified as at-risk have remained stagnant. This phenomenon was recently and vividly illustrated in the December 2019 Performance Audit conducted Kansas Legislative Division of Post Audit (LPA). LPA's bottom-line conclusion was "The state's new requirement that at-risk funding be spent on evidence-based practices is poorly managed at the State level and not adequately implemented at the District level. Specifically, we found Districts spent most of their at-risk funds on teachers without assurance the funding targets at-risk students or employs evidence-based practices and programs."
LPA's recommendations were:
- The Department should ensure that any guidance they provide to the Districts reflects current state law.
- The Department should establish a process to determine that any identified programs and practices are evidence-based and for at-risk students.
- The Board should more thoroughly oversee the process for identifying at-risk programs and practices.
KSDE and the State Board pushed back claiming they complied with the law passed and that it was not the Legislature's intent to have the Board actually publish a list of approved practices and programs. They defended using at-risk funds to pay for general educational expenses because at-risk kids are in the classroom. LPA stood firm behind its conclusions.
Given these responses, the concern is that without a legislative response that clearly states a directive and intent with regard to targeting at-risk funding toward at-risk students, the promise of improving the lives of these students will be an empty one. SB173 is an effort to put teeth in the LPA recommendations.
It is difficult to ascertain from the KSDE website how they came to list "evidence-based practices" as it has not been updated to reflect amendments to the at-risk statute made in 2019. KSDE has acknowledged before this Committee that the JAG-K program is an evidence-based peer-reviewed program with a national reputation for outstanding results, but it is not listed.
The bill also calls for a follow-up LPA audit to ensure that the Legislature's intent and directive is carried out. (Attachment 5)
Mark Tallman, Associate Executive Director, Kansas Association of School Boards (KASB), testified as a proponent stating it is the belief of the Association that the high density weighting factor should be made permanent. There is clear evidence that Districts with higher percentages or concentrations of low-income students face greater challenges in reaching academic standards. This need was identified in the 2006 Kansas Legislative Post Audit K-12 Cost Study which recommended an additional weighting factor based on the number of free lunch eligible students.
Allowing the high-density weighting to expire will remove resources from students who need it most. If not made permanent, it needs to be extended.
This bill places in state statute the criteria for receiving at-risk services based on current criteria determined by the State Board of Education and adds identification of dyslexia. It also allows for at-risk funds to be used for professional development, increases accountability while maintaining flexibility, and clarifies language and reporting requirements.
KASB supports these changes with the understanding the bill directs the State Board of Education to prepare a list of approved at-risk programs based on best practices and requires Districts to use programs from the list and experiment with provisional programs for up to three years. Districts will continue to use at-risk funds on programs which are targeted at at-risk students but may also benefit students who are not at-risk. (Attachment 6)
Written Proponent testimony was submitted by:
Dr. Tiffany Anderson, Superintendent, Topeka Public Schools USD 501, (Attachment 7)(Attachment 8)(Attachment 9)(Attachment 10)
Deena Horst and Ben Jones, Legislative Liaisons, Kansas State School Board (Attachment 11)
Chairman Baumgardner requested of Mike O'Neal and Heidi Zimmerman to collaborate on the At-Risk list KSDE has compiled.
There being no other Conferees, the Chair closed the hearing on SB173.
Chairperson Baumgardner explained the Committee had received a copy of Substitute for Senate Bill 43. The Committee will work the bill in the next Committee Meeting. The Chair's recommendations for the Kansas State Department of Education Budget was distributed.
The Chair adjourned the meeting at 2:27 PM.
The next Committee Meeting will be February 19, 2021 at 1:30 PM in Room 144-S.
