[D]uring the last two years, both Education Committees in the Legislature have toiled over the best way to get a handle on the cost of special education while improving the quality of teaching for struggling students.
This session they nailed it down, passing a comprehensive bill that will do just that while saving some money. This was such an attractive option for a governor who has pledged to keep taxes flat, that he didn’t just sign it last Friday but decided to include it in his five-year plan for the education fund.
After thanking Gov. Phil Scott for signing it, House Speaker Mitzi Johnson, D-Grand Isle, praised the two committees for producing such a sweeping measure. She said those who will benefit most from it are the children.
“The single most important function of state government is the education of our kids,” she said, adding, “We’re proud of our top-notch education system.”
The law, which paves the way for new classroom practices that should help struggling learners before they are identified by loosening some red tape and reducing administration, was unanimously passed by the House in March.
Several studies into costs and best practices formed the basis for the law. The first study found that Vermont spends just about the right amount on general education but about $140 million more than it needs to on special education. The other two studies found that putting best practices into place and changing the way the state pays for services would deliver better and more cost effective services to more students.
Lawmakers hope this new approach, to be phased in over five years, will target funds and better serve kids, said House Education Committee Chair David Sharpe, D-Bristol.
“Hopefully, it will allow efforts and programs in schools to address the needs of students and help students who already have an IEP [Individualized Education Plan] be more successful,” Sharpe said.
Funding will shift to a census-based grant from the current reimbursement system, meaning that districts will receive funding based on the total size of their student population, rather than all funding being tied to students identified as needing special education.
This funding can be used at the discretion of local schools, freeing them up to implement programs and hire specialists to serve struggling students before they need special education. The idea is to rely on quality teaching services rather than paraeducators. The law also modifies the amount the state reimburses schools and determines how private schools will be compensated for taking on students needing special education services.
Professor Tammy Kolbe of the University of Vermont authored one of the reports that inspired the legislation. She said the new law will improve the systems in place to support needy students. It also “provides educators with the flexibility they need to implement innovative practices to better serve students with a range of learning needs.”
The Scott administration figures the state will be able to save about $34 million by 2024 with the new funding system.
“If we continue to take this approach, we can better provide more and better opportunities for all students, and some relief for taxpayers,” Scott stated after signing the bill.
But the Joint Fiscal Office continues to question the administration’s assumptions and math in the five-year plan. At a recent presentation to the Senate Finance committee, education fiscal analyst Mark Perrault said many school districts may not be able to reduce spending as quickly as the administration expects.
“We think it will work and will save money, but if a district is unwilling or unable to bring special education spending down to the flat number, if they can’t achieve that savings, it will show up in their education spending,” Perrault said. “You can’t assume level spending just because you have a grant.”
The administration also did not take into account the way special education changes could affect savings it assumes will come from raising staff-to-student ratios. For example, a school could replace five paraeducators with a qualified special education teacher who makes significantly more money.
“If you look at these provisions individually and come up with cost estimates and sum them up, you will come up with a number too high because they are all interactive,” Perrault said.
House Speaker Johnson said that if Scott truly wants to attract more families to Vermont, then that state has to strive for the best for every kid. That, she said “is the way we preserve a strong, healthy future for Vermont kids and the way we attract young families.”