[T]he House has passed legislation that makes sweeping changes to the way Vermont pays for and delivers special education.
On a unanimous vote Thursday, lawmakers approved a plan that spreads special education money across the entire student population and frees up teachers to better help struggling students while avoiding excessive red tape.
Education Committee Chair David Sharpe, D-Bristol, said the changes included in the measure are large and complex. “This is a very big undertaking for us in the Legislature,” he said.
Fellow committee member Kate Webb, D-Shelburne, said the policy change is more significant than Act 46 — the school district governance law — because it affects teachers, parents and students.
The bill has its roots in a suite of reports, starting with the 2016 Picus report that said Vermont over-identifies students and spends about $140 million more than it should on special education. This report led to a pilot program and report with the District Management Council that identified best practices the state should adopt. The other report, by the University of Vermont, looked at how the state pays for special education services. Researchers found the reimbursement model being used isn’t working well for teachers or students.
Sharpe said his committee learned struggling students who haven’t been identified as needing special education yet would be better served if supervisory unions can adopt policies that the current funding system won’t allow. As schools modify their approach, the reports and pilot study indicate there would be cost savings.
“The UVM study came back and said if we change the model of how we deliver special education along the lines of the best practices outlined by the District Management Council we could indeed save a lot of money — between $70 million and $80 million from the education fund. That struck home for us,” Sharpe said, adding his committee spent the next two months putting H.897 together.
The Vermont Council of Special Education Administrators supports the findings from both studies and the legislation itself. “The current reimbursement model is problematic,” said Traci Sawyers, executive director of the group. “ It takes a lot of administrative paperwork and other things and we really need much more flexibility to implement best practices.”
Webb, also a special educator, pointed out on the House floor that the bill eliminates paperwork that educators have had to submit to the state under the reimbursement system. “If you are interested in reducing bureaucratic busy work — listen up,” she said. “It’s gone, and that’s a big deal. Multi-page reports that need to be completed by special educators, paraeducators, business managers, special education directors will no longer need to be done.”
The new formula is based on the entire student enrollment rather than just the number of special education students in the school. It will be phased in over five years and in 2021, school districts will get an average amount based on the three previous fiscal years divided by the number of students in the district. In 2025, a new base census amount will be put in place. There will be an adjustment for school districts that have a large number of students under the poverty level.
The state is obligated to pay for 60 percent of the costs for a student on an Individualized Education Program after $50,000, but that funding will be covered by census grants.
In addition, a special education category called “extraordinary” will have its own dedicated funds. Under current law, if the schooling costs $50,000, the state picks up 90 percent. Because that threshold hasn’t changed since 1994, the bill updates the trigger to $60,000 with an inflator and the state picks up 95 percent of the cost.
Rep. Scott Beck, R-St. Johnsbury, said the state is taking on more financial responsibility for special education students than it has in the past.
There is a provision that allows supervisory unions that have already been working with the District Management Council as part of the pilot program to begin working with the new law immediately. An advisory group will work closely with those entities and then recommend the best way forward for the rest of the state.
An amendment by Rep. Brian Cina, P-Burlington, adding a family member or other individual who is directly affected by special education to the advisory panel was also approved unanimously.
