1 / 59

OAASFEP October 2014 What’s Going On?

OAASFEP October 2014 What’s Going On?. Leigh M. Manasevit, Esq. lmanasevit@bruman.com Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC www.bruman.com. Congress Department of Education Federal Communications Commission Office of Management and Budget. Congress. Not much Election Day – November 4 th

gari
Download Presentation

OAASFEP October 2014 What’s Going On?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OAASFEPOctober 2014What’s Going On? Leigh M. Manasevit, Esq. lmanasevit@bruman.com Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC www.bruman.com

  2. Congress • Department of Education • Federal Communications Commission • Office of Management and Budget

  3. Congress • Not much • Election Day – November 4th • Total days in session after summer recess – 12 • Days in Session October 1 to November 4 2

  4. Status of Policy Legislation

  5. Overall Legislative Picture Fiscal issues Everything else No time/energy for substantive policy debate

  6. Why Isn’t Education a Priority? • Limited opportunities to move legislation • Limited time left on legislative calendar • High degree of partisanship • High number of “must-act” issues and priorities • Constant crisis situation • Significant possibility of primary challenges, electoral turnover • Education not a deciding issue for most voters • Bottom line: need to take significant, fast action on issues that have maximum press and electoral impact

  7. WIA: The Rare Success • Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (H.R. 803) passed Congress on July 9th, 2014 • Product of “pre-conference” discussion among bipartisan group of lawmakers • “Streamlines” WIA by eliminating some programs (but maintains major targeted programs) • Makes some changes to makeup of State, local WIBs (to increase role of businesses/employers) • Expands scope of AEFLA program • Sets new performance metrics for all programs

  8. Early Education • Administration plan announced in President’s State of the Union address • $77 billion in subsidized universal pre-K for low/middle-income families over next decade • Federal share paid for through increase in tobacco taxes (maybe) • States receive funding for adopting certainquality standards • Including class size, education level and pay of instructors, State-level inspections and audits, etc. • Federal share drops from 90% to 25% over 10-year period

  9. Early Education • Strong Start for America’s Children Act (S. 1697) • Focus on universal, voluntary pre-K for low-income three and four-year-olds • Funds would be disbursed based on a state’s share of four-year olds living at or below 200% of the poverty line. • Requires set staff qualifications, class size requirements, salaries, early learning and development standards, longitudinal data systems • No action to date • Questions remain about federal role, how to offset cost

  10. Child Care and Development Block Grant • Bipartisan bill (S. 1086) passed in Senate on March 13, 2014 would: • Require States to conduct background checks of employees, including checking state criminal and sex-offender registries and state-based abuse and neglect registries • Require States to set aside more money to boost program quality (increasing from 4 percent of total now to 10 percent by 2018) • Ensure that program staff are trained in basic safety measures like CPR • Increased State monitoring and oversight responsibilities • Require States to check family eligibility for subsidies no more than once a year (focus on continuity of child care) • No action to date in House • Opposition from some organizations • Increased costs to States/providers with no additional federal funding

  11. IDEA • No action to date • Focus is on “full funding” of existing federal obligation • “Full funding” = 40% of excess cost of educating students with disabilities • Letters in House and Senate to appropriations Committees asking for increased IDEA formula funding • Wide support from Democrats • Some support from moderate Republicans • Unlikely to move before ESEA

  12. Charter Schools • Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act (H.R. 10) • Would combine two existing federal programs (Charter School Grant Program and Charter School Credit Enhancement Program) • 15% can be reserved by ED for charter school financing • 10% can be reserved by ED for “national activities” • Including disseminating best practices • Priority to States with more open charter laws • Changes to lotteries: • Would allow grants to go to schools that use weighted lotteries that “give slightly better chances for admission to …educationally disadvantaged students” (if permitted by State) • Permits students to go from one charter to another without having to re-enter lottery • Authorizes an additional $50 million annually for the Charter Schools Program (CSP) • Passed House in May 2014 (awaiting action in Senate)

  13. ESEA Reauthorization: Senate • Strengthening America’s Schools Act of 2013 (S. 1094) passed out of Committee on party line vote June 12th • Based largely on waivers, October 2011 ESEA legislation • Requires States to adopt standards, assessments, performance targets • Sets “n-size” at 15 students • Increased data/reporting requirements (cross-tabulation) • Interventions in priority/focus schools • Adds personnel expenditures to comparability calculation • States must implement teacher/principal evaluations • Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) says he hopes to get it to the floor, but prospects still murky

  14. ESEA Reauthorization: House • Student Success Act in (H.R. 5) passed House of Representatives on July 19th, 2013 • Similar to bills passed in 112thCongress • Eliminates AYP, HQT requirements • States would get to set own performance targets, little federal guidance • Teacher/principal evaluations required (with student achievement as a significant factor) • Overall smaller federal role

  15. ESEA Reauthorization: Overall Few similarities between bills mean conference/agreement unlikely Consensus: reauthorization will wait until 2015 or later • This means starting from scratch in January 2015 • Impact of ESEA waivers still TBD • give relieve to some districts/States (unless don’t qualify/waiver revoked) • causes conflict with Congress (and States, as compliance issues, high-risk, revocations continue) • promotes administration priorities (but Common Core, testing coming under fire)

  16. Department of Education: Waivers

  17. Waiver States • 41 States, the District of Columbia, and California’s CORE districts • Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky,Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin

  18. Waivers Pending • Wyoming

  19. Waivers Withdrawn & Rejected • Rejected: • California • Iowa • Withdrawn: • North Dakota • Vermont

  20. “High Risk” & Revoked Waivers • “High Risk”: • Oregon, August 2013 • Arizona, December 2013 • California’s CORE districts, September 2014 • Revoked: • Washington, April 2014 • Failed to include student achievement in teacher and principal evaluations • Oklahoma, August 2014 • Repealed Common Core and failed to replace it with equally rigorous standards

  21. Non-Waiver States • Montana & Nebraska have not applied for a waiver

  22. Waiver Renewal • 35 States’ waivers will expire this summer • 31 have submitted renewal requests so far • 23 States, the District of Columbia, and California’s CORE districts have been granted waiver extensions • Arkansas • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Idaho • Indiana • Kansas • Kentucky • Maryland • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Nevada • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • South Carolina • Tennessee • Virginia • Wisconsin

  23. Secretary Duncan • 2014 – 2015 transition year – teacher accountability • New 2015 -2016 deadline teacher accountability – student test scores • See Deborah Delisle Letter • http://www2.ed.gov/policy/eseaflex/secretary-letters/cssoltr8212014.html

  24. Teacher accountability • 17 States and the District of Columbia will likely request the test score flexibility • Alabama • Arkansas • Connecticut • Delaware • Georgia • Idaho • Kansas • Maryland • Michigan • Mississippi • Missouri • Ohio • Oregon • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Utah

  25. Teacher accountability • 12 States are not likely request the test score flexibility • Arizona • Colorado • Florida • Kentucky • Massachusetts • Minnesota • Hawaii, Indiana, and Wisconsin are unsure • West Virginia, Maine, and New Hampshire received their waivers too late to be eligible for the flexibility • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • Pennsylvania • Tennessee • Virginia

  26. GAO study on Waivers • Senator Lamar Alexander (R – TN) • Representative John Kline (R – MN) • August 12, 2014 – requested study on • ED process • Issues for states • Accountability • http://www.help.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/?id=f9e1224c-21e6-4f1a-9602-ff4e361ac2dc&groups=Ranking

  27. Common Core

  28. Repealed Common Core • Indiana (April) • Implemented standards very similar to Common Core • Oklahoma (June) • Reverted to old standards • South Carolina (May) • Using Common Core for 2014-2015 • Drawing up new standards for 2015-2016

  29. Adopted Slight Changes, But No Repeal • Florida (February)

  30. Reconsidering Common Core • Missouri (July) • Using Common Core for at least two years • Reviewing and potentially revising for 2016-2017 • North Carolina (July) • Created a commission to review Common Core and make recommendations for improvement • Common Core will be used at least for 2014-2015

  31. Growing Pressure to Repeal • Louisiana • Gov. Bobby Jindal wants Common Core repealed • Jindal had suspended the use of PARCC exams, saying the Superintendent John White and the State board did not properly follow contracting procedures • However, a judge lifted Jindal’s PARCC suspension • Jindal has now filed a lawsuit against ED and Sec. Duncan, claiming that offering ESEA waivers and Race to the Top went beyond Duncan’s legal authority and coerced States into adopting Common Core • New Jersey • Gov. Chris Christie has created a commission to review the effectiveness of Common Core assessments, and the assessments now have less importance in teacher evaluations

  32. Growing Pressure to Repeal • New York • More than 62,000 residents have signed on to an effort to create a new "Stop Common Core" ballot line to allow voters to voice their concerns about the state's new education standards • Ohio • Ohio legislature has begun holding hearings on Common Core repeal bill

  33. Growing Pressure to Repeal • Wisconsin • Gov. Scott Walker called for the legislature to repeal Common Core in 2015 • Utah • Gov. Gary Herbert is having the state attorney general review the standards’ connections to the federal government

  34. PDK Gallup Poll on Educationhttp://pdkintl.org/noindex/PDK_Poll_46.pdf • 60% American oppose Common Core – too restrictive for teachers

  35. Discipline – Disparate Impact continues as High Priority

  36. Administration Weighs in on Disparate Discipline Joint ED DOJ Letter, January 8, 2014 • Discipline: • Administration encourages policies that are fair and avoid disparate impact • Impact high rates of suspension / expulsion • Disparate impact on minority students

  37. Assistant Secretary office of Civil Rights (OCR) – ED – Catherine Lhamon • ED aggressively focused on reducing disparaties • Past 5 years 1,500 complaints to OCR

  38. New Guidance on ELL SWDs • July 18, 2014 • Cover letter: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/cover-letter-els-w-disabilities-7-18-2014.pdf • Q&A: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/q-and-a-on-elp-swd.pdf

  39. Requirements: • IDEA, SWDs included in all statewide assessments • Titles I, and III all ELL students tested for English proficiency

  40. How do ELL SWDs participate? • Regular, no accommodation • Regular with accommodation • Alternate Determination made by IEP team

  41. Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, 2010 Community Eligibility Option

  42. Community Eligibility Option (CEP) • Eligible schools – Free Meals – All students • Available to all LEAs 2014-2015 with eligible schools

  43. Community Eligibility Option • Eligible School • 40% students certified-free meals through means other than household application SNAP / TANF

  44. Community Eligibility Option • Multiplier (initially 1.6) • Conduct certification at least once every four years (more frequently optional) • Reimbursement based on resulting number

  45. Community Eligibility Option • Title I Implications: • Disaggregation: economically disadvantaged All students • Eligibility based on poverty: All students

  46. Community Eligibility Option • Title I Implications • School Eligibility and Rank and Serve Use number from multiplier

  47. USDA Guidance • February 25, 2014 • -LEA may include all or some schools • http://www.fns.usda.gov/community-eligibility-provision-evaluation • -Eligibility may be school x school – • -Group or • -Aggregate of total

  48. No Rounding!!! • …39.98% DOES NOT qualify • (AG actually says this)

  49. Federal Communications Policy • Beginning January 2015 application for 2015 -2016 • Use CEP rate to calculate E-Rate discount rate

  50. Office of Management and Budget • The Omni Circular is Here!

More Related