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