Education Committee's Summer Updates

This week the House and Senate Education Committees received three reports on the progress of studies being conducted during the summer and may serve as some indication of the focus that may be taken by the committees beginning in January. However, much of the work of Education is really in the context health care, jobs, energy and local control issues.

The first study on Educational Cost Analysis states, in brief, that comparisons to locate efficiencies is not possible because the different educational configurations in Vt. may attribute costs to different levels of school government (SD, SU, LEA) and that business managers/administrators do not completely follow handbook II. (There is also the difficulty of following ed. and human service dollars and responsibilities.) There is nothing in this summary that was new and I am disappointed that the findings only re-state the questions that were asked of the accountants. The recommendations refer to two main considerations: financial management and accounting, and the need for outcome data of individual student performance that is not averaged by school or district to show gains over a yearly period. This would have to be tied to socio-economic factors to make it meaningful. The rest of the report is suggestions that identify options but give no guidance as to how to implement them. However, they will serve as a jumping off point for generating ideas and are worth exploration. A summary and the entire document on education cost analysis is available on http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/education.htm.

The second study was to provide information on Special Ed Services and funding implications by Medicaid. It is to study how the agency of human services, the department of education, and the department of employment and training should provide for special education services for eligible persons under 22 years of age in school or out of school and for other human services-related services for elementary and secondary schools. This study highlights the fact that schools in Vermont are really department stores that are held responsible for providing multiple services to students and families. A second part of the study was to explore how to maximize federal Medicaid funds by ensuring that all students eligible for Medicaid or Dr. Dinosaur are enrolled and stay enrolled in programs. It is also required to estimate the number of students with IEPs who lose coverage because of nonpayment, the number who are uninsured and eligible, and the number privately insured and eligible so that the financial impact of State Child Health Plan (SCHIP -health ins. for limited income) can be determined. Again, schools are providing more than education services. The committees asked that this study be updated to include the potential costs of recent federal changes that have that have cut the amount of federal dollars available for special education, have disallowed use of Medicaid funds for helping working families afford health care under the recently passed Catamount Health plan due to accept applications in October, and reduce, by 25 million dollars, the funds available to SCHIP. This is a triple whammy that hits the same population and shifts costs directly to the schools. It is a major concern because Vermont, under the global commitment agreement with the federal government had been granted a waiver from federal restrictions on the use of Medicaid dollars allowing them to use them in what Vermont determined the most efficient manner possible but if we would accept a cap on the total dollars. We did but now, with these rules changes we are being told how the money must be spent but are not granted the dollars that go with that outside control.

Commission Cate, reported on work being done by the DOE. He has identified high and low spending districts (top 20% and bottom 20%) based on per pupil spending within a school district. This data is not available since current law (act 130) requires that costs be listed by town rather than aggregated. A case study of these schools may be helpful in identifying best practices that could be applied across the state. Seven schools have been identified as high spending districts.(Bethel, Brattleboro, Craftsbury, Dummerston, Londonderry, Peru, Rochester) There are no schools in Franklin County that are subject to a two part vote because of additional spending. However, since the DOE is no longer permitted to review building additions and to deduct the cost of these additions from the per-pupil cost, any school that goes into a building project on their own may exceed the high spending threshold.

Please let me know your perspective on these issues. I need your input so that I can know the feelings of people from home. I can be reached by E-mail at ggilbert@leg.state.vt.us, or at my home answering machine at 849-6333.

Gary Gilbert
State Representative
Fairfax/Georgia