ERIC ED449618: Special Education Facilities Funding Report: An LAO Report.

19 Pages·0.36 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
EC 308 224
ED 449 618
Guyer, Christopher
AUTHOR
Special Education Facilities Funding Report: An LAO Report.
TITLE
California State Legislative Analyst's Office, Sacramento.
INSTITUTION
2000-01-03
PUB DATE
NOTE
17p.
California State Legislative Analyst's Office, 975 L Street,
AVAILABLE FROM
Suite 1000, Sacramento, CA 95818; Tel: [phone]; Web
site: http://www.lao.ca.gov.
Descriptive
Reports
Numerical/Quantitative Data (110)
PUB TYPE
Evaluative (142)
Reports
(141)
MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Block Grants; Categorical Aid; *Disabilities; *Educational
DESCRIPTORS
Facilities; *Educational Finance; Elementary Secondary
Education; Expenditure per Student; *Finance Reform;
Financial Needs; Financial Support; Grants; School
Buildings; School Funds; Special Education; *State Aid;
*State School District Relationship
*California
IDENTIFIERS
ABSTRACT
This report reviews the method and level of funding for
special education facility needs in California and recommends modifications.
It begins by summarizing special education programs, describes classroom
needs, and finally discusses past and present facilities funding methods. A
discussion of various options for funding special education facilities
follows, along with a recommendation for funding new construction and
modernization projects. The review found that local authorities should be
given the responsibility to provide the facilities required to educate all of
their pupils while minimizing state and local administrative costs; that the
grant levels adequately address special education facility needs except for
special day classes; that classification of special day class pupils as
"severe" and "nonsevere" does not accurately reflect the facility needs of
the population; and that a reasonable methodology is needed to provide for
new construction and modernization to Medical Therapy Units. Based on the
(1) establish a uniform facility grant
review, the legislature is urged to:
(2) establish a separate facility grant for county offices of
for all pupils;
education; and (3) require county offices of education to provide local
matching funds except in financial hardship cases and establish a revolving
loan fund to assist county offices in providing local matching funds.
(CR)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
EC
00
Speda_ Educc2agon
part
Fad
Fundno)
ehle§
(6.
This report is in response to Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998 (SB 50,
Greene), which directed, our office to review, in conjunction with the
Departments of Finance and Education, the method and level of fund-
ing for K-12 special education facility needs and recommend modifica-
tions, as appropriate. The type of facility needed varies depending on
the special education program and pupil disability. Programs include
designated instruction, resource specialist, special day class, and
nonpublic school.
1A0 Auktop
Local authorities should be given the responsibility to provide the
facilities required to educate all their pupils while minimizing state
and local administrative costs.
The grant levels in Chapter 407 adequately address special educa-
00%
tion facility needs except for special day classes. This is because a
portion of the special day class population will require higher cost
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
facilities such as toilet rooms and daily living space in the classroom.
BEEN GRANTED BY
Classification of special day class pupils as "severe" and
"nonsevere" does not accurately reflect the facility needs of the
population.
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
A reasonable methodology to provide for new construction and
modernization of Medical Therapy Units.
Based on our review, we recommend that the Legislature:
Establish a uniform facility grant for all pupils. This will stream-
03)
line the funding process, maximize local flexibility to provide fa-
cilities needed to serve all their pupils, and minimize state and
EDUCATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
Improvement
Office of Educational Research and
local administrative costs.
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERIC)
12( This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
Establish a separate facility grant for county offices of education
originating it.
to
0 Minor changes have been made
in recognition of the special education pupils served at county
improve reproduction quality.
facilities.
in this
Points of view or opinions stated
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
Require county offices of education to provide local matching funds
000
except in financial hardship cases. The Legislature should estab-
lish a revolving loan fund to assist county offices in providing
local matching funds.
January 3, 2000
2
[INTRODU
[ION
This report is in response to the requirement in
For purposes of determining the state's total
funding for a project (the number of pupils times
Chapter 407, Statutes of 1998 (SB 50, Greene)
that the Legislative Analyst, in conjunction with
the grant amount per pupil), existing classrooms
the Departments of Education and Finance,
are assumed to accommodate an average of 25
review the method of funding the construction
pupils in grades K-6 and 27 pupils in grades 7-12.
and modernization of school facilities for special
In adopting this new program, the Legislature
education pupils. These pupils are individuals
recognized that the grant amounts and the as-
between birth and age 22 who have exceptional
sumed average number of pupils per classroom
education needs because of various physical,
did not adequately account for the classroom
mental, or emotional conditions. Consequently,
needs of pupils in special education. Conse-
there is a need to provide a portion of these pupils
quently, Chapter 407 includes a provision for the
a classroom setting that differs from the regular
State Allocation Board to adopt interim measures
classroom. This report addresses the different
for determining state grants for special education
classroom needs and recommends a streamlined
classrooms. The board has adopted interim
process for state funding consistent with the new
measures that provide state grants ranging from
funding program established by Chapter 407.
about $2,500 to $15,000 (rather than the $2,300
to $7,300 range of the regular program). Chap-
New State Program for
ter 407 stipulates that the board's interim mea-
Funding K-12 Construction
sures are to remain in effect until July 1, 2000 and
Chapter 407 established a new state program
are then to be changed taking into consideration
for assisting in the funding of K-12 school facilities.
the recommendations in this report.
The new program provides state funds on a per-
pupil basis for both the construction of new
Review of the Program
schools and modernization of existing schools.
In conjunction with staff from the Departments
These grants currently range from about $2,300 to
of Education and Finance, we reviewed special
$7,300 depending on whether (1) the project is
education programs and facilities throughout the
for modernization or new construction and (2) the
state. This included meetings with State Allocation
facilities are for elementary, middle, or high school
Board staff and with facilities and program special-
purposes. Grants are based on the state providing
ists at both the state and local levels, site visits to
50 percent of the cost for new construction and
several special education facilities across the state,
80 percent for modernization. The grants can be
and a statewide survey of Special Education Local
increased to 100 percent if a local school demon-
Plan Area administrators to obtain information on
strates an inability to provide its share of the cost.
programs and associated facility needs. In addi-
2
;,
Legislative Analyst's Office
tion, consideration was given to an advisory report
classroom needs, and (3) a discussion of the past
that was prepared by a special education facilities and present facilities funding methods. These are
followed by a discussion of various options for
committee convened by the State Department of
funding special education facilities, along with our
Education. The draft report developed from the
recommendation for funding new construction
above activities was then discussed with staff from
the Departments of Education and Finance.
and modernization projects.
In this report, we provide (1) a summary of
special education programs, (2) an overview of
§FEEOAL EDUCATION
PROGRAMS
Consistent with these requirements, the Califor-
Special education programs are provided
throughout California's K-12 public education
nia Master Plan for Special Education requires
system for individuals from birth to age 22 who
schools to assess each pupil's educational needs
and consider a range of options to provide the
have exceptional education needs because of
various physical, mental, or emotional conditions.
appropriate program for each pupil. The master
plan, implemented statewide in 1980 with the
Program Background
enactment of Chapter 797, Statutes of 1980
Federal law defines the disabilities that qualify a
(SB 1870, Rodda), established an areawide ap-
child for special education and mandates school
proach for delivering special education services.
responsibilities and parental rights. Federal law
These areas, called Special Education Local Plan
sets out three basic principles that apply to chil-
Areas (SELPAs), are administered by local school
dren with disabilities:
officials and are responsible for assuring that the
necessary range of educational programs are
All children with disabilities must be
available to the pupils in their area. The SELPAs
provided a free, appropriate education.
range in area of responsibility from multicounty to
Each child's education must be deter-
a single school district. For example, of the 116
mined on an individualized basis and
SELPAs in 1998-99, 3 were multicounty; 33 were
designed to meet his or her unique needs
countywide; 48 were multidistrict; and 32 were
in the least restrictive environment.
single district. These SELPAs covered all of the 997
K-12 school districts and 58 county offices of
The rights of children and their families
education operating that year.
must be ensured and protected through
procedural safeguards.
3
Current Program Funding
From 1980-81 through 1997-98, school districts
In view of the concerns over program cost-
received funding for special education based on
based funding, the Legislature established a new
the educational program (such as special day
funding method with the enactment of Chap-
classes, designated instruction and services,
ter 854, Statutes of 1997 (AB 602, Poochigian and
resource specialists, and nonpublic schools) in
Davis). Under this program a specific amount of
which each pupil was placed. In order to obtain
funding for special education is provided based on
state operating funds, a district was required to
the total number of all pupils enrolled in a SELPA
identify the disability and placement setting for
rather than the number of special education pupils
each special education pupil. Over time, this
enrolled in specific educational programs. School
funding mechanism was considered an unduly
districts are no longer required to identify either
complex and inequitable system that restricted
the number or placement of special education
local decisions and innovation. In addition, the
pupils for state funding purposes. The funding for
program's cost-based funding tended to encour-
special education is provided directly to SELPAs
age placement of pupils in programs that resulted
rather than school districts. Each SELPA is respon-
in receiving more state funding but were not
sible for distributing the special education funds in
necessarily the most appropriate placement for
a manner consistent with the educational pro-
the pupil.
grams and needs of the pupils within the SELPA.
ACEME5 NEEDS
5PEOAL EIDUCATION
A variety of program placement options are
"pull-out" basis in a separate classroom. The
program can include speech, vision, audiological,
available for special education pupils. Program
counseling, and health servicesdepending on
placement coupled with the nature of the special
pupil needs. Instruction is provided by a regular
education pupil's disability results in a variety of
class teacher, special class teacher, or qualified
classroom facility needs. These program place-
resource specialist teacher. Based on discussions
ments and associated classroom facility needs are
with staff of the State Department of Education
discussed below.
and State Allocation Board, adequate facilities are
Designated Instruction and Resource Special-
provided for these programs through the basic
ist. These services are offered either on an indi-
K-12 regular education grant amount provided
vidual basis or in a small group setting. Pupils
under Chapter 407. Consequently, a funding
spend the majority of the school day in the regular
adjustment for special education is not necessary
classroom, with additional services provided on a
for these services.
4
tie
Legislative Analyst's Office
Special Day Class. Special education pupils
Medical Therapy Units. Depending on their
whose needs are not best met through a regular
physical disability, some special education pupils
education program with supplemental services
may need occupational and/or physical therapy.
(such as the designated instruction or resource
This need is separate and independent of the
specialist program) are placed in special day
education program placement of the pupil. Fre-
classes, where they spend the majority of the day.
quently, therapy services are provided at a school
Classroom facilities for these programs can vary
in areas such as multipurpose rooms, gymnasiums,
significantly depending on the educational pro-
and outdoors. At times, however, when there are
gram and the severity of the pupil's disability. The
sufficient number of pupils in a SELPA that need
higher cost for some of these classrooms is the
these services, a separate facility known as a
primary reason why an adjustment to the basic per-
Medical Therapy Unit (MTU) may be needed. The
pupil construction grant is made.
facility required for an MTU can range from a
large classroom to a multiroom complex, depend-
Nonpublic Schools. In cases where a public
ing on the number of pupils served and the
school cannot effectively or efficiently run any of
therapy required. Funding for these highly special-
the three programs listed above, services can be
ized facilities is not part of the Chapter 407 per-
obtained by contracting with a private, nonpublic
pupil grant.
school. These nonpublic schools must be licensed
pursuant to the Education Code. A SELPA enters
Enrollments in Special Education
into a contractual agreement with the private
Figure 1(see page 6) summarizes enrollment in
school to provide the special education pupil the
special education and total K-12 enrollment from
appropriate educational program. The necessary
December 1, 1996 through December 1, 1998.
classroom facilities are the responsibility of the
As the figure shows, enrollment in special educa-
private school and are not part of the state school
tion has steadily increased both in total number
facilities program.
and as a percent of K-12 enrollment. Figure 1 also
shows the placement of special education pupils
State-Operated Programs. This option includes
in each of the programs over the last three years.
placing pupils in the state-operated School for the
It indicates that nearly all special education pupils
Blind in Fremont and the Schools for the Deaf
were placed in either designated instruction/
located in Riverside and Fremont. These programs
resource specialist programs (about 67 percent)
are provided in state-owned facilities. These
and special day classes (about 30 percent).
facilities are funded through the state's annual
budget process along with other state capital
Pupils with a given disability may be placed in
outlay needs and are not part of the state school
any of the available programs, depending on the
facilities program.
educational need and the least restrictive environ-
6
Figure 1
Special Education Enrollment
and Placement
1996 Through 1998
.
(December 1 Pupil Count, Ages 0-22)
1998
1997
1996
Percent
Percent
Percent
of Total
Enrollment
of Total
Enrollment
of Total
Enrollment
23.4%
147,389
23.9%
145,573
24.1%
142,274
Designated instruction
43.7
274,549
43.4
264,906
43.2
Resource specialist
254,511
191,954
30.5
30.3
184,579
178,246 30.3
Special day class
12,007
11,679
1.9
1.9
10,715
Nonpublic school
1.8
2,949
0.5
0.5
3,300
0.6
3,533
State-operated programsa
Totals, Special Education
100.0%
100.0% 628,848
610,037
100.0%
589,279
Totals, K-12 Enrollment
5,844,111
5,727,303
5,612,965
Special Education, Percent
of K-12 Enrollment
10.8%
10.7%
10.5%
a
Includes pupils in State Development Centers and Department of the Youth Authority institutions.
grants. In addition, the unique need for MTUs is
ment for the particular pupil. For example, in 1999
not addressed in the regular education per-pupil
there were 14,527 orthopedically impaired special
grant. Thus, in the balance of this report, we
education pupils, placed as follows: 3,855 in desig-
address the facility needs and funding for special
nated instruction/resource specialist programs,
day classrooms and MTUs, and our recommenda-
10,581 in special day classes, 87 in nonpublic
tion for adjusting state funding grants to provide
schools, and 1 in a state-operated program.
these facilities.
As discussed above, about 70 percent of the
special education pupils are enrolled in designated
Facility Needs of Special Day Classrooms
instruction/resource specialist programs, state-
In general, even though the number of pupils in
operated programs, or nonpublic schools. Facili-
a special day class is about half the number in a
ties for these programs are provided for either
regular classroom, a special day classroom needs
through the Chapter 407 regular education per
to be larger. This is because more space is gener-
pupil grant, the state budget, or private funds. The
ally needed for (1) storing wheelchairs and other
remaining 30 percent of special education pupils
mobility equipment, (2) daily living skill areas
are enrolled in special day classes. Facilities for
(such as a kitchen), and (3) toilet rooms with
special day classes are not adequately addressed
direct classroom access. Of course, the need for
in Chapter 407's regular education per-pupil
these additional spaces varies considerably de-
6
6
Legislative Analyst's Office
Past and Present Funding Methods
pending on the nature of the pupils. As a result, all
Lease Purchase Program. Between 1976 and
special day classrooms do not need each type of
1998, special day class needs were determined by
extra space. In those cases where spaces such as
(1) classifying disabilities as "severe" or
toilet rooms or kitchens are required, the cost to
"nonsevere," and (2) assigning a classroom size,
construct the special day classroom will be higher
the number of pupils per classroom, and an
than a regular classroom. On the other hand,
allowable cost per classroom. The Office of Public
special day classrooms that are simply somewhat
School Construction in the Department of Gen-
larger with more storage space are only marginally
eral Services prescribed unit cost standards for
more costly. The state construction grant program
various types of construction and facility use.
should take into account the significant differences in
Figure 2 summarizes the factors used to determine
these facility needs and associated construction cost
state funding levels. As shown in the figure, the
differences for special day classrooms.
.Figuer
Lease-Purchase Program
Special Day Class Basic Needs
1976 Through 1998
.
.
.,
Number of
COSt Per
Classroom Size
Pupils Per Square Foot
Grade
Classroom
(Square Feet)
Level
(April 1998)a
Nonsevere Disability
Specific learning disability
All
1,080
$83.10
12
Mildly mentally retarded
All
83.10
1,080
12
Severe disorder of language
All
1,080
10
92.51
Severe Disability
13
Deaf and hard of hearing
All
1,080
10
Visually impaired
All
1,330
$89.38
10
Orthopedic or other health impaired 2,000
All
83.10
12
Autistic
89.38
All
1,160
6
Severely emotionally disturbed
All
1,160
89.38
6
Severely mentally retarded
Elementary 89.38
1,750
12
Severely mentally retarded
Secondary 2,150
89.38
12
Developmentally disabled
2,000
All
89.38
10
b
Deaf/blind, multihandicapped
All
1,400
5
a
Cost data are for Class B constructionconcrete/steel framingas of April 1998.
b
Data not available.
7
struction, a district receives a $5,764 grant for
number of pupils per classroom ranged from five
each special education pupil classified as
for multiple handicap pupils to 12 for orthopedi-
nonsevere-10 percent higher than the grant for a
cally impaired pupils. Classrooms ranged from
regular education pupil. For each K-6 pupil classi-
1,080 square feet to 2,000 square feet and in-
fied as severe, the grant is $10,480double the
cluded special needs such as toilet facilities, extra
amount for regular education pupils. Consistent
storage space, and daily living skills development
with Chapter 407, if a district can demonstrate an
areas.
inability to match the state fundscalled a hard-
Current School Facilities Program. Under
ship casethe state will provide both the state and
Chapter 407, the State Allocation Board has
district share. The State Allocation Board's regula-
adopted interim regulations to provide state funds
tions do not require county offices of education
for special education facilities. These regulations
to meet the same hardship criteria as districts, and
continue the practice of classifying disabilities as
in most cases counties qualify for 100 percent
severe and nonsevere, but funding is based on a
state funding.
per-pupil grant rather than an allowable cost per
classroom. Under the regulations for new con-
PTIONS FOR FUNIINNG CONSTRUCTION
?MAI. DAY CLASSROOMS
OF
Local administrative costs to obtain state
In considering alternative methods for funding
grants should be kept to a minimum.
special day classrooms, we used the following
basic principles:
Keeping these principles in mind, we considered
the options discussed below for funding new
Local officials should have maximum
construction and modernization.
flexibility to construct the facilities they
need to properly serve their pupils.
We also assessed the State Allocation Board's
current nonsevere and severe grant amounts to
Funding for construction should not
determine if the grants are at a reasonable level.
encourage the reporting of pupils by
The board established the special education grants
disability category in order to maximize
based on actual project cost information and from
state funding for a project.
testimony received during development of the
There should be minimal state administra-
interim regulations. In our judgment, the grant
tive review and associated costs.
levels are reasonable and adequately provide for
8
a
Legislative Analyst's Office
Maintain the State Allocation Board's
the necessary special day classroom facilities.
Current Method and Level of Funding
However, the use of pupil classifications as "se-
This option would make permanent the board's
vere" and "nonsevere" does not necessarily reflect
temporary regulations, which are now in place. It
the need to construct more costly classrooms.
would continue the practice of linking types of
Our review indicates that approximately 80 per-
disabilities to facility needs and would require
cent of the special day class enrollment requires
applicants (K-12 districts and county offices of
somewhat larger classrooms and additional
education) to identify the number of pupils in the
storage space. This type of space is provided
categories of severe and nonsevere. Applicants
through the board's 10 percent increase in the
would also need to identify the number of class-
per-pupil grant. The other 20 percent of enroll-
rooms currently available for each category and
ment requires the higher cost classrooms that
demonstrate a need for additional classrooms by
include a larger classroom, additional storage, and
category based on an assumed number of pupils
high cost facilities such as toilet rooms and kitchen
per classroom. For this purpose, the board as-
space. These classrooms are the basis for the
sumes 25 pupils per classroom for grades K-6 and
board's 100 percent increase in the per-pupil
27 pupils for grades 7-12. Once the capacity for a
grant. These ratios (80 percent and 20 percent) of
school has been determined, state funding would
classroom needs were used in assessing the
be provided based on the number of "unhoused"
adequacy of the funding levels that would result
pupils in each category. The per-pupil grants
from each of the four options discussed below.
currently authorized under these regulations are
The following four options for funding new
shown in Figure 3 (see page 10).
construction and modernization are discussed
This option does not meet the basic principles
below.
in several ways. Local administrative costs are not
Maintain the current method and level of
minimized because of the need to maintain
funding.
records and report categories of pupil disabilities.
This was not an additional administrative burden
Maintain the current method and increase
in the past because this information was required
the level of funding.
for state funding of the operating budget. How-
Provide a single grant for all special day
ever, with the operating budget changes discussed
class pupils.
earlier in this report, this information is no longer
needed by the state. In fact, requiring these data
Provide a single grant for all pupils includ-
for construction funding runs counter to the
ing nonspecial day class pupils.
emphasis in the operating budget of funding
based on total enrollment (regular and special
9
0