Upload
madlyn-casey
View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Special Education Finance
MAASEDecember 3, 2012Michele A. Harmala, Ph.D.Farmington Public SchoolsAssociate Superintendent, Instructional Services and Organizational Leadership
State Aid•Foundation Allowance
•Categorical (Section 51a)
•SE Transportation
Revenue
PA 18
•OISD
IDEA and Preschool Incentive
•Federal
Medicaid•Federal
State Aid•Foundation Allowance
•Categorical (Section 51a)
•SE Transportation
PA 18
•ISD
Medicaid•Federal
28.6138% Obligation for S.E Cost $286,138 and
70.4165% for S.E. Transportation Cost
Section 53 funds for eligible students (100% reimbursement)
Foundation Allowance State Aid
Section 51a
Special Education State Obligation
$160,000
$126,138
1 2
IDEA$40,537,53
Pre School$1,289,715
Federal Programs Under Normal Circumstances: OISD 2009-10
7.9%
10.8%
0.3%8.8%
72.2%
Allowable SE 4096 Cost
Transportation
Other
Ctr Tuition
Federal Programs
Division of Special Education Costs in Oakland ISD
FY 07/08
45.9%
26.5%
1.2%
8.8%
17.4%General Education State Aid
Federal
Medicaid
P A 18
Division of Special Education Revenues for OISD LEAs FY 07/08
Calculation of State Aid
Special Education Cost $1,000,000
State Obligation (@28%)
Primary Bucket
$286,138
Foundation Allowance Deduct
($8,000 x 20 FTE)
$160,000
Difference between Obligation and Foundation Allowance
Section 51a Payment
Bucket 2
$126,138
Public Act - 18
Public Act 18 (PA-18) funds are the 2.5456 mils raised by the Oakland ISD taxpayers for the operation of Special Education Programs within Oakland ISD. It is clearly affected by the SEV of the community.
Funding Priorities of PA 18 in OISD
1. ISD Operations2. Common ISD programs such as:
1. Start-Up and Extraordinary2. Section 24 and Group Homes3. Capital Needs
3. Distributions to the LEA (PA-18 Distribution)
Special Education Funding
Public Act 18: County SE millage How funds are used is determined by County
EXAMPLE: OS costs Center costs covered Remainder allocated Weighted per pupil formula
Greater time in GE = more dollars per formula Increase of 1 FTE yields 1 foundation allowance (may be
spread across multiple students) Percent of students with IEPs in GE 80% or more in the last 5
years: 64%, 63%, 62%, 46%, 43%
Special Education Funding
MDE assures approx. 28% of total allowable costs
If foundation is greater than 28%, the 28% is considered part of foundation allowance—no additional funds
Example:$50,000 para
10,000 SE Tchr
4,000 GE Tchr
$64,000 Total
$60,000 allowable
X .28% reimb.
$16,800 - $6,800
foundation
$10,000 reimbursed
Special Education Funding
Example:$4000 GE Tchr$6700 SE Tchr
+ $2300 Speech$13,000 Total (9,000 allowable
cost)X .28 % reimb.$2520 (less than
foundation, therefore no reimbursement)
Center for Special Education Finance: National Statistics
Special Education Cost Approximations Cost of Basic
Classroom Programs 3 times cost of GE
elementary 2.45 times cost of GE
middle school 2.3 times cost of GE high
school
Cost of Resource Room Programs 1.8 times cost of GE
elementary 1.3 times cost of GE
middle school 1.2 times cost of GE high
school
Considerations
High expectations for all students All students are general education students Disability is a natural part of the human
experience IDEA focuses on outcomes & results Special Education is a service, NOT a place.
MEGS to manage Flowthrough and Preschool Funds & the SE-4096 MEGS is the online system used by the MDE 3 grants are visible (coded by color: Red, Blue,
Green) Past 2 Current
Yr 1 of 2012-13 Yr 2 of 2011-12
SE – 4096 is the SE Cost Report used by the MDE Documents SE expenditures Learn about Maintenance of Effort (MOE)
Strategic Cost Containment
How to address the unique needs of special education staff? Train the trainers model Use of contractual district PD days Release time during the school year Use of technology, WIKIs, Moodles for large
group or independent learning Folders on shared hard drive After school or summer PD
Shared Ownership/Leadership All staff need to understand financial implications of
decisions District-wide awareness of SPPIs, CIMS, public
reporting, etc. Responsibility for monitoring achievement and discipline
data (suspension/expulsion) Principals share ownership of the staff evaluation
process AYP implications for achievement of students with
disabilities Focus on curriculum, instruction, assessment of and for
learning, and professional growth
Culture
Need to explicitly teach staff how to be part of the bigger system
Engage in open sharing of information and trust that it will be used for good
Remember that special ed has no magic wands; just fewer kids
Separate funding streams may separate us at times, but don’t use it as an excuse
Strategic Cost Containment Focuses on: Leveraging existing district initiatives/process Eliminating redundancy Coordinating resources Shared responsibility/accountability Preservation of special ed funds for unique
needs
Local District Changes to Control Costs: Increasing time for all students in GE, with support Providing a continuum of services, and service in
the ‘home’ school Serving center eligible students in FPS (Autism) Dispersing ancillary staff across multiple buildings
increases cost (mileage) and reduces efficacy (knowledge of students/staff/school)
Increasing early intervening services (ICT) and implementing Positive Behavior Support
Using professional vs. paraprofessional staff