Beverley Holden Johns, an expert in special education, warns of a move planned by the Legislature to give money to poor districts by taking away special education funding from other districts. Poor districts gain at the expense of kids with disabilities. There is no increase in funding overall.
Subject: TRIB: Diverts special ed $ for general purposes
You cannot spend the same money twice.
In his last weekly message Illinois State Superintendent of Education Tony Smith stated:
“Reallocate the appropriation for the Special Education –
Funding for Children Requiring Special Education Services
line ($305.2 million) into the GSA [General State Aid] appropriations to increase the Foundation Level.”
If you are reallocating over $300 million to increase the Foundation Level in GSA, you cannot also spend that money on special education.
If you spend the money on special education, you have not increased the Foundation level.
This is the Illinois version of the great shell game where the pea represents funding for programs for students with disabilities.
The Federal special education law, IDEA, requires Maintenance of Effort (must spend the same amount or more on special ed next year that was spent this year) both for the State AND for local school districts. While there are rare exceptions to MOE, this is not one of them.
Almost every school district in the State would get more money if Illinois cuts special education to fund General State Aid.
This is a regional funding fight where you have to take money away from current programs if you completely fail to add huge sums of new money, which Illinois will not and probably cannot now do given political reality.
And the target is: ALL the special ed line items.
That is why Sen. Manar is so in favor of it. His bill that passed the State Senate last year drastically cut special ed through a block grant that completely removed the tying of State dollars to the hiring of special ed teachers, and other professionals.
This is a critical issue. Direct and dedicated funding for special education is at great risk.
If you can do it for THIS special ed line item, you can do it for EVERY special ed line item.
Yes, MOE is the law. But who is going to enforce the law?
(and remember last year the Federal Office of Special Education Programs – OSEP – stated MOE did not apply in many situations, before being forced to change its position).
The special ed administrators across the country are supporting a bill in Congress (H.R. 2965) to weaken MOE.
Bev Johns
————————————–
Sunday, January 17, 2016
State plan shifts funding to needier school districts
Proposal diverts special ed money to be used for general expenses
By Diane Rado
Chicago Tribune (Front page)
Almost half of school districts in Chicago’s suburbs would lose money under a dramatic proposal to rejigger how the state divvies up money to public schools, with affluent districts targeted for cuts and less wealthy districts set to get more state aid.
To make it happen, the Illinois State Board of Education is proposing to take $305 million from an account designated for special education services and give that money to districts next school year for general expenses that may have nothing or little to do with kids with disabilities.
The idea is to boost “general” state aid for public schools in what the state board believes would be a more equitable way. Even without this source of funding for special education, districts would be expected to continue covering those costs as required by law.
The General Assembly would have to approve the changes.
The plan has spurred confusion and concern as districts grapple with the bottom line. The state’s analysis shows that 641 districts would gain $339 million under the proposal, including Chicago Public Schools, while 211 districts would lose $29.5 million. Those figures are based on 2015-16 calculations.
But two-thirds of those losing districts are in the Chicago suburbs, making up $26.6 million of the loss felt statewide.
Those districts would no longer get dollars from the $305 million portion of the special education account, and they’d lose general state aid dollars as well, likely meaning that something will have to be cut to make ends meet.
“It stinks,” said Wheaton-based Community Unit School District 200 Superintendent Jeffrey Schuler. His district stands to lose about $843,000, according to an ISBE analysis.
Meanwhile, special education advocates are trying to understand the consequences of yanking money that has historically been set aside to serve schoolchildren with special needs.
“I think when school districts are faced with the kind of financial situations they’re in, the question is, will services for children with disabilities be hurt, and I believe they will,” said longtime special education advocate Beverley Holden Johns.
“The state is in a budget crisis — I understand that. But it is crazy to put that on the backs of children with disabilities,” said Johns, who is active in several special education organizations in Illinois.
She questions the legality of the state board’s proposal, though the board insists that what it wants to do is legal.
Melissa Taylor, president of the Illinois Alliance of Administrators of Special Education, believes districts must keep paying for special education services — and cannot reduce spending from the prior year — to comply with federal law.
She said her organization has been uncomfortable in the past when state lawmakers tried — unsuccessfully — to pull money out of various state special education accounts. But the group hasn’t taken a stance yet on the newest proposal.
It’s a difficult situation, Taylor said. “It is that Catch-22. While it scares us in some regard, we also recognize that it does allow districts hurting the most to recapture some funds. To be completely opposed to it is like saying we aren’t concerned about the needs of our districts hurting the most.”
The Illinois State Board of Education unanimously approved the proposal earlier this month as part of state schools Superintendent Tony Smith’s recommendations for state spending on public schools in 2016-17.
Some board members expressed concerns, including how special education programs would fare for some 300,000 students served — about 14 percent of the school population.
The goal of the proposal is to address long-standing concerns about unequal funding for public schools. Some districts spend more than $20,000 per student while others spend less than $7,000, state data show.
Broad efforts to reform the funding system have included using special education money to boost general state aid, but those efforts have stalled.
That said, the state board believes the best way to help make funding more equal is to bolster the $5 billion General State Aid program, which gives districts wide flexibility on how to spend money and is distributed to districts based on factors such as local property wealth, number of students and the concentration of low-income kids.
Special education is treated differently, with dollars set aside to cover certain categories of services, such as helping pay salaries for special education teachers and summer school costs for students with disabilities, among other services.
The $305 million special education pot that the state wants to put into general state aid is now used to supplement local and federal funds for special education.
It’s one of the big-ticket items in the state board’s spending plan, representing about 20 percent of the $1.5 billion for the major special education categories.
Why the board chose special education dollars — and not other pots of money to be put into general state aid — isn’t clear to advocates and educators.
The board pointed out the money in that $305 million special education category is not distributed as equitably as general state aid….
The state board also recommended giving $300,000 to a handful of charter schools authorized by the state to make up for losing money if the special education proposal goes through. The allocation is based in part on differences in the way those charter schools are funded compared with public school districts.
There’s no similar appropriation to help offset losses for districts….
State Sen. Andy Manar, D-Bunker Hill, has been pushing for school funding reforms in recent years, and has included in his legislation the idea of putting pots of special education funds into the General State Aid program.
Thus far, the legislation has not passed the state House and Senate.
Manar praised the ISBE’s proposal to bolster state aid by using the special education money.
“I think the board’s actions are a step in the right direction,” Manar said. “As difficult as that was, I firmly believe that we need a broad systemic change” to cure Illinois’ inequitable school funding system.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
One way to cure school funding is to stop funding dual education systems. Stop funding charters as public schools. This idea of Illinois is bad and a precursor to ease more charter formations at the expense of kids with disabilities. I don’t quite understand the thinking. You take the set aside money the state has for special Ed and divide it and give it to the general school fund under a formula that more equitably distributes resulting in poorer districts getting more money. However, the district’s must maintain the same level of service for special Ed as they did the year before. I may be seeing this wrong but it seems to benefit charters already since their level of service has always been low or non existent. Given the desperate finances of some districts, they would grab this and juggle special Ed services in different ways. I say, don’t do it!
LikeLike
BREAKING–SUNY Charter School Institute to consider freezing additional Success Academy charters and non-renewal of existing charters pending an examination of the network’s enrollment practices and attrition.
https://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20160118/fort-greene/suny-probing-discipline-at-success-academy-fort-greene-report-says
When provided with actual, verifiable evidence of wrongdoing, Success’s authorizer acted.
LikeLike
The US DOE may be filing or joining an action against SA soon, also. Unclear what the subject matter would be.
LikeLike
But Tim, you’re always telling us that Eva and SA are pure as driven snow, and are on a Mission From God to overcome the racism and incompetence that is endemic among those big, bad public schools teachers, administrators and parents.
But then you give us this “actual, verifiable evidence of wrongdoing?”
Or is that poor schmoe of an SA Principal being set up as a scapegoat for Eva’s policies and practices, while SUNY Charter Institute makes a desperate lunge for credibility?
LikeLike
“But Tim, you’re always telling us that Eva and SA are pure as driven snow, and are on a Mission From God to overcome the racism and incompetence that is endemic among those big, bad public schools teachers, administrators and parents.”
Since I’m always telling you that, it ought to be very simple for you to provide a single example of where I’ve actually said anything even remotely like this.
(And I’m still waiting for your meaningful, actionable plans to reduce school segregation by further breaking down the link between street address and school assignment.)
What I had said in the past is that while it was easy to find people on the internet who were eager to claim Success counseled out, verifiable complaints weren’t reaching the authorities who could, you know, actually do something about it. Now that SUNY has gotten complaints — real names, real people, real kids — they are acting.
I would not support charter schools in New York State if the state didn’t have the strong authorizing and accountability structures that it does. Let’s see what happens with due process.
LikeLike
Actually, Tim, all we do know is that SA transgressions became public knowledge. We have no idea what information has been passed on to SUNY in the past.
LikeLike
Standard tactics: pit the suburban parents against the poor and people of color. Manipulate existing unconscious racism and privilege by using their children as a weapon. “Disgusting” is too mild a word.
LikeLike
When did it become acceptable to take money away from disabled children? Is it related to the federal assumption that if we use magic accommodations all special students can learn at grade level?
LikeLike
Utah has a bill coming up that would allow “block grants–” including special education money. So the districts could spend the money anyway they wanted and forget special education completely. See lines 138-141
http://le.utah.gov/~2016/bills/static/HB0094.html
LikeLike
Of course those poor districts are required to keep funding special ed at its current levels as are the wealthier districts. Some of their wealthier districts draw families with special ed students because they have more extensive services (services closer to what kids actually need). What will happen first is paraprofessional staff will be cut. IEPs will be revised to eliminate in class support which is sometimes necessary to allow students to succeed in mainstream classes. Self contained classes will lose assistants and class sizes and caseloads will increase. Illinois has been trying for several years now to cut support to special ed. Those that make the decisions never deal with actual children. Numbers rule.
LikeLike
I am a special education teacher, so of course this kind of diversion of Funds rubs me the wrong way. That said, the federal government has never Fully funded IDEIA and all of the preceding special education laws. Until the Feds Fully fund the law, expect these kind of shenanigans to occur. (The extra capital Fs are due to my messed-up keyboard.)
LikeLike