The Future of Educational Policy in Pennsylvania · • Authorizing Statutes • Every Student Succeeds Act • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ... ESSA Title II: $76

Tri-State Area School Study CouncilUniversity of Pittsburgh

The Future of Educational Policy in Pennsylvania

March 6, 2020

■ Jonathan Berger, Director of Government Affairs, PSBA

■ Mark DiRocco, Executive Director, PASA

Federal UpdateIssues on the National Ed. Agenda

• Federal Education Budget

• ESSA

• School Safety

• 2020 Census

• School Vouchers

Edu-Policy 101• Authorizing Statutes

• Every Student Succeeds Act

• Individuals with Disabilities Education

Act

• Higher Education Act

• Carl D. Perkins Career & Technical

Education Act

• Head Start/Childcare Development

Block Grants

• Russell School Nutrition Program

• Others that aren’t necessarily

‘education’: Farm Bill, Affordable Care

Act, Telecommunications Act, et…..

Federal Education BudgetFiscal Year 2020

Federal Education Funding finalized December 2019 for fiscal year 10-1-19 to 9-30-20.

The more than 2,000-page bill appropriates $738 billion in fiscal 2020 funding for the defense discretionary spending and $632 billion for non-defense discretionary spending.

Specific to education, the bill provides $40.1 billion for K-12 education programs, which is an increase of $1.2 billion above the 2019 enacted level and $5.9 billion above the President's budget request.

Source: AASA

Federal Education Budget Fiscal Year 2020K12 Programs

■ ESSA Title I: $450 million increase to $16.3 billion

■ ESSA Title II: $76 million increase to $2.1b (first increase in 6 years)

■ ESSA Title III: $50 million increase to $787m (first increase in 5 years)

■ ESSA Title IV: $40 million increase to $1.2b

Source: AASA

Federal Education BudgetFiscal Year 2021 – Dead on Arrival

Federal IDEA Funding

IDEA Funding is Up, But Federal Share is Down

Although Congress increased funding for special education grants to state (IDEA Part B) by $400 million for fiscal year (FY) 2020, the federal share of the "excess" cost of educating students with disabilities actually fell from 14.3 percent in FY 2019 to an estimated 13 percent in FY 2020.

When Congress enacted the first special education law in 1975, it pledged to provide up to 40 percent of the excess cost of educating students with disabilities but has never come close to this "full funding" percentage.

Federal law mandates that school systems provide a free appropriate public education to all students, regardless of the federal contribution. As a result, when the federal share of the costs declines schools need to use more of their state and local funding for special education. For FY 2020, Congress would have had to triple the $12.8 billion it provided to reach the full funding

Source - AASA

ESSA Annual Financial Reporting

• PA building-level financial reporting for 18-19 was filed with PDE as part of the Annual Financial Report

• PDE sent to US Dept of Education in late 2019

• PDE will post on their website in spring 2020

• Know your numbers and prepare your narrative!

New Federal School Safety Website Launched

■ This February the Trump administration unveiled its highly anticipated School Safety Clearing House, which will act as a one-stop-shop for all of Districts school safety and climate needs.

■ The website – https://www.schoolsafety.gov – comes in response to recommendations from the U.S. Department of Education's Commission on School Safety, which was established after the tragic mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Source - AASA

https://www.schoolsafety.gov/

ON THE HORIZONin Washington D.C.

2020 Federal Census is coming soon.

Make sure you reach out to your local officials to assist

with the census.

Federal dollars are allocated based on the census!

10

Public Loss, Private Gain: How School Voucher Tax Shelters

Undermine Public Education

AASA and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) identified how state

and federal tax policy promotes the privatization of education funding, while

simultaneously draining public coffers to enable savvy taxpayers to turn a profit.

Seventeen states divert a total of over $1 billion per year toward private schools via

school voucher tax credits such as PA’s EITC Program.

When combined with a federal tax loophole, nine of these states’ credits are so

lucrative that they allow some upper income taxpayers to turn a profit (at federal

taxpayer expense) on contributions they make to fund private school vouchers, all

while leaving less resources available for federal investments in education.

Simply put, wealthy taxpayers are benefiting from a federally sanctioned voucher tax

shelter.

State Update

Who says, “the legislature never changes”

Party Affiliation/Control in the Legislature

• House

• 107 Republicans

• 93 Democrats

• 3 vacancies (former Republican seats)

• Senate

• 28 Republicans

• 21 Democrats

• 1 Independent (Sen. Yudichak caucuses with the Republicans)

Leadership in the Senate

President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati

Leadership Position Majority Minority

Floor Leader Jake Corman Jay Costa

Whip John R. Gordner Anthony H. Williams

Caucus Chair Bob Mensch Wayne D. Fontana

Caucus Secretary Ryan Aument Lawrence M. Farnese Jr.

Appropriations Chair Patrick M. Browne Vincent J. Hughes

Caucus Administrator Kim L. Ward John P. Blake

Policy Comm. Chair David G. Argall Lisa M. Boscola

Leadership in the House

Speaker Mike Turzai

Leadership Position Majority Minority

Leader Bryan Cutler Frank Dermody

Whip Kerry A. Benninghoff Jordan A. Harris

Caucus Chair Marcy Toepel Joanna E. McClinton

Caucus Secretary Mike Reese Rosita C. Youngblood

Appropriations Chair Stan Saylor Matthew D. Bradford

Caucus Administrator Kurt A. Masser Neal P. Goodman

Policy Committee Chair Donna Oberlander P. Michael Sturla

Education Committee Chairs

■ Senator Wayne Langerholc (Bedford, Cambria, and Clearfield)• Vocal about concerns with current charter law.

• Held two public hearings on charter school reform.

■ Representative Curtis Sonney (Erie)• Vocal about concerns with current charter law (specifically cyber charter

schools).

• Introduced HB 526 – Provides that school districts with full-time cyber education programs will not pay cyber charter costs.

• Introduced HB 1897 – Requires that each school district provide cyber education options, and converts cyber charter schools into contractors.

• Held a public hearing on HB 1897.

Legislators Who Will Not Seek Reelection:

•Sen. Andrew Dinniman (D-Chester)•Sen. Joe Scarnati (R-Jefferson)•Rep. Stephen Barrar (R-Delaware)•Rep. Thomas Caltagirone (D-Berks)•Rep. Gene DiGirolamo (R-Bucks) ***•Rep. Cris Dush (R-Jefferson)•Rep. Garth Everett (R-Lycoming)•Rep. Matt Gabler (R-Clearfield)•Rep. Neal Goodman (D-Schuylkill)•Rep. Marcia Hahn (R-Northampton)•Rep. Mark Keller (R-Perry)•Rep. Bill Kortz (D-Allegheny)•Rep. Steve McCarter (D-Montgomery)•Rep. Thomas Murt (R-Montgomery)•Rep. Ted Nesbit (R-Mercer)***•Rep. Harry Readshaw (D-Allegheny)•Rep. Justin Simmons (R-Northampton)•Rep. Mike Tobash (R-Schuylkill)•Rep. Marcy Toepel (R-Montgomery)•Rep. Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny)•Rep. Justin Walsh (R-Westmoreland)***•Rep. Rosita Youngblood (D-Philadelphia)

What Does All This Mean?• Special elections for the three vacated seats will take place on

March 17 but those winners will have to run again in the primary in April and the general in November.

• Vote margins are closer.

• Continued loss of moderate Republicans in the House.

• More conservative House and Senate Republican Caucuses.

• Significant leadership changes coming.

• Turzai and Scarnati were heavy school choice advocates.

• Chairman/Chairwomen seats change.

• Significant election year.

• Democrats focused on flipping chambers.

Significant Legislative Items on the table for 2020…

■ Education funding increases (BEF, SEF, etc.)

■ Property tax reform

■ School safety and security funding

■ PlanCon/Small Projects

■ Charter school reform

■ Act 82 reform

Governor’s Proposed Budget

20

2020-21 Proposed State Budget

■ $36.056 billion proposal: 4.22% ($1.46 billion)

increase

■ BEF: $114.6 million increase

$100 million BEF

$14.6 million Social Security

■ SEF: $25 million increase

■ CTE: $0 increase

■ Charter School Reform: $280 million in Savings

■ Potential $405 million increase for public education

Budget Proposal by the Numbers

(In Thousands) 2019-20 Budget 2020-21 Budget Difference

Basic Education $6,742,838 $6,857,471 $114,633

Special Education $1,186,815 $1,211,815 $25,000

Ready-to-Learn $268,000 $268,000 $0

Career & Technical Ed $99,000 $99,000 $0

CTE Equipment Grants $5,500 $5,500 $0

Transportation $549,097 $549,097 $0

Nonpublic/Charter

Transportation$79,442 $79,442 $0

Pensions $2,628,000 $2,747,000 $119,000

Early Intervention $314,500 $325,500 $11,000

Teacher Prof. Dev. $5,309 $5,809 $500

Education Revenue Sources

40.1% 40.6% 39.7%

59.9% 59.4% 60.3%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

Shares of Education Revenues (Percentage) Since 1993-94

State % Local %


$4.4

$11.5

$6.5

$17.5

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

$14

$16

$18

Billio

ns

Shares of Education Revenues (in Dollars) Since 1993-94

State Local


90% State 60% Local

PA Ranks

44th in

terms of

State

Share

38.7%


80% State 80% Local

Expenditures per student

PA Ranks

9th

nationally

$15,798

National Assessments

39.7%

47.3%

35.2%

38.6%

34.3%

40.4%

32.4%32.9%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

4th Grade Reading 4th Grade Math 8th Grade Reading 8th Grade Math

2019 NAEP Results - % Proficient or Above

Pennsylvania (National Rank) National Average

6th

7th

16th

8th

BEF Breakdown

2019-20 Governor’s Budget Proposal

• Gov. Wolf’s proposal includes $6.86 Billion in BEF funding.

• Up $114.6 million (1.6%) from 2019-20.

How much will go through the BEF Formula this year?

Math required

Description Amount

Total Line Item Increase $114,633,000

Social Security ($14,633,000)

Actual “New” BEF Money $100,000,000

Money already in BEF formula $698,667,244

Total money for BEF formula $798,667,244

BEF Formula Update

$5,556

$5,556

$799

$699

$502

$488

$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000

2020-21

Proposed

2019-20

Millions

Base BEF "New" Money for Formula Social Security

11.2% of BEF to Formula

12.6% of BEF to Formula

The Value of a Weighted ADM…

FY Ending

Cumulative NEW

Student Weighted

(SW) portion of BEF

Annual $ Increase

in BEF SW portion

% Increase in

Student

weighted

portion

Total SW

ADM's in

the Formula

Statewide

Value Per ADM

(Lost or

Gained) for

each SW ADM

SW ADM

Value

Annual

change

SW ADM

Annual

change %

2016 153,429,768$ 2,922,628 52.50$

2017 351,817,692$ 198,387,924$ 129.3% 2,924,083 120.32$ 67.82$ 129.2%

2018 452,667,283$ 100,849,591$ 28.7% 2,980,192 151.89$ 31.57$ 26.2%

2019 538,667,240$ 85,999,957$ 19.0% 2,944,759 182.92$ 31.03$ 20.4%

2020 698,667,194$ 159,999,954$ 29.7% 2,948,958 236.92$ 54.00$ 29.5%

2021 798,667,194$ 100,000,000$ 14.3% 2,958,029 270.00$ 33.08$ 14.0%

BEF Formula VALUE of a Student Weighted ADM

BEF Formula: Part 1

BEF Formula: Part 2

BEF Factors

20-21 BEF formula uses 2018 Census Data

The census factors are all FINAL:

Acute Poverty

Concentrated Poverty

Moderate Poverty

Median household income

Number of Households

■ PDE formula factors not set until June As more $ goes through formula = greater volatility Based on initial PDE estimates, more than 20

districts could receive less than 2019-20

Basic Education Funding

Increases since the formula’s implementation - Rural – 7.6%

Urban – 17.0%

Suburban – 12.7%

Special Education Funding

• $25 million (2.1%) increase proposed in 2020-21

• Would mean $174 million distributed under the new special education formula

• $11 million increase in early intervention

• Separate line item

Special Education Funding

$1.01

$1.03 $1.03 $1.03 $1.03 $1.03 $1.03

$1.05

$1.08

$1.10

$1.12$1.14

$1.19

$1.21

$1.0

$1.1

$1.2Billio

ns

State Special Education Funding

Up 18% Since

2013-14

Special Education

$2.88$3.08

$3.26 $3.32$3.51

$3.74$3.94

$4.19$4.49

$4.70

$1.15$1.34 $1.31 $1.20 $1.20 $1.24 $1.28 $1.28 $1.32 $1.34

$0

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

Billio

ns

State & Federal SE Funding vs SE Expenses

State Federal SE Expenses

Special Education

33.8%31.9%

30.1% 29.8% 28.3% 26.7% 25.9% 24.4% 23.3% 22.7%

6.1%

11.6% 10.0%6.5% 6.0% 6.5% 6.5% 6.0% 6.1% 5.9%

60.1%56.4%

59.9%63.7%

65.7% 66.8% 67.6%69.6% 70.6% 71.5%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

State Federal Remaining share (local)

Special Education

15.1% 15.1%15.2% 15.2%

15.3%15.5%

15.9%

16.4%

16.8%

17.1%

Percent of School District Students in Special Education

SEF Formula

MV/PI

Aid

Ratio

Equalized

Millage

Multiplier

Category 1:

Student Count

X Weight

Category 2:

Student Count

X Weight

Category 3:

Student Count

X Weight

Total

Weighted

Student

Count

Total

Weighted

Student

Count

Small, Rural

School District

Factor

Total

Weighted

Student

Count

District Total

District TotalDistrict

Total to

Prorate

Governor Wolf’s budget proposal

• Additional $119 million in State School

Employees’ Retirement funding

• Could mean an increase of $98 million in

school district contributions

• No relief in sight

Pensions

Pensions

15.6%

1.6%

15.8%

1.0%

90.0%

474.4%

0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500%

US Inflation Rate

All Other

Expenses**

Other Purchased

Services*

Salaries

Charter School

Tuition

Pensions

Growth in Expenses – 2010 to 2017-18

* These include outside educational services, transportation, food services, liability insurance, and other tuition payments

** These exclude fund transfers and debt service payments

PROJECTED EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION RATES AND TOTAL EMPLOYER

CONTRIBUTIONS

*

(Presumes a 7.25% rate of return)

Fiscal Year

Ending June

Total Employer

Contribution Rate %

Projected Total Employer

Contribution (thousands)

01/02 1.09 $95,000

10/11 5.64 $560,000

18/19 33.43 $4,604,983

19/20 34.29 $4,759,452

20/21 34.51 $4,858,318

21/22 34.95 $4,993,968

22/23 35.62 $5,170,820

27/28 38.17 $6,027,091

PSERS Contribution Continues to Weigh Heavy

On School District Budgets

PSERS Employer Contributions & Spending

2017-18

13.9%

2017-18

32.57%

2020-21

34.51%

2027-28

38.17%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Pensions as % of Current Expenses Actual ECR Projected ECR

46

2000

123.8%

2019

58.1%

2026

66.6%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

110%

120%

130%

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

20

21

20

22

20

23

20

24

20

25

20

26

PSERS Funded Ratio

Pensions

* BEF amounts and increases based on actual/available budget line item looking back at the prior year.

** Total school district pension contributions minus state share of retirement contributions. 2016-17 is most recent year available.

$49

$123

$4

$165

$200

$100

$173

$218 $216 $209$223

$150

-$124

-$96

-$212

-$44-$23

-$50

-$250

-$200

-$150

-$100

-$50

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Millio

ns

BEF Increase* SD Share of Pension Increase** Difference

Pensions – Local Impacts

• Proposed increase in BEF would be surpass increase in local

share of pension costs

2020-21 Increase

Basic Education $100,000,000

Estimated Local Share of

Pension Increase$98,000,000

Net Change $2,000,000

Early Childhood Education Funding

■ $25 million Pre-K Counts

(11.5%)

■ $5 million Head Start (7.8%)

49

Transportation Slow Leak

50

Level-funded at $549M for regular transportation and

$79.5M for nonpublic/charter transportation.

■ Budget proposal ignores the law

■ Intentionally underfunded – no increase in last 5 years

■ Cumulative impact of sustained underfunding is approximately $150 million

■ Reimbursement projected to be insufficient by March

What Funding Pieces are Notably Missing from the Governor’s

Proposed Budget

• No CTC funding Increase.

• No transportation funding increase.

• No Plan-Con appropriation request.

• School safety grants only $15 million in proposal.

Other Administration Budget Initiatives

• Minimum teacher salary becomes $45,000

• There is NO SUBSIDY proposed to assist LEAs to cover increased

costs

• PSEA Estimate: $12-$14 million

• Commonwealth Foundation Estimate: $39 million

• Mandatory Full-Day Kindergarten

• There is NO SUBSIDY proposed to assist LEAs to cover increased

costs

• General minimum wage increase

Minimum Wage Proposal

$12.00 $12.50

$13.00 $13.50

$14.00 $14.50

$15.00

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

School Construction and Renovation

Update

Governor’s proposed budget does not include

money to re-start PlanCon.

Governor’s Proposal

Up to $1 billion in grants from the

Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program

(RACP) used for lead and asbestos

remediation in schools.

Approximately $1.7 million in grant funds will

be used to develop and implement a lead

testing program in schools.

Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program (RACP)

• RACP is a state grant program administered by the Office of the Budget for the acquisition and construction of regional economic, cultural, civic, recreational and historical improvement projects.

• Since 1986, $6.3 billion in funding; about 3,000 projects

• Source of funding is Commonwealth GO Bonds

• All grants awarded through the RACP MUST be for projects included in one (1) or more of the PA Capital Budget Project Itemization Acts. Potential projects are typically found in the Capital Budget Project Itemization Act or added by enactment through the members of the House of Representatives, Senate and Governor.

• A RACP project must have a total cost of at least $1,000,000.

• At least 50% of the project cost must be match (non-state) participation.

Current RACP Statute■ Act 1 of 1999, as amended, mandates that Grantees must be one of the

following:

■ (1) A redevelopment authority.

■ (2) An industrial development authority.

■ (3) A general purpose unit of local government.

■ (4) A local development district that has an agreement with a general-purpose unit of local government under which the unit assumes ultimate responsibility for debt incurred to obtain the non-State financial participation.

■ (5) A public authority established pursuant to the laws of this Commonwealth.

■ (6) An industrial development agency:

■ (i) which has been certified as an industrial development agency by the Pennsylvania Industrial Development Authority Board under the act of May 17, 1956 (1955 P.L.1609, No.537), known as the Pennsylvania Industrial Development Authority Act; and

■ (ii) which is itself or which is acting through a wholly owned subsidiary that is exempt from Federal taxation under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

PlanCon Updates - Act 70 of 2019

Created a new school construction and renovation approval process that’s

divided into four steps:• Project justification• Construction documents• Project bid awards• Project completion

PDE is required to develop a web-based application and data collection

system that allows school entities to submit required documentation

through the internet.

Provides incentives (10%) for energy savings projects such as LEED

20% set-aside for small projects such as roofs and boilers

5% set-aside for school safety related projects

Governor’s Charter Reform Proposal

Governor Wolf proposed comprehensive charter school

reform as part of the 2020-21 budget

• House Bill 2261 (Ciresi)

• Senate Bill 1024 (Williams and Brewster)

Reforms the charter school law by increasing transparency,

accountability, and establishing a more reasonable funding

formula.

Mandated Cost Increases from 2007-08

253.5%

453.4%

626.8%

131.1%149.4%

193.6%

32.9%48.4%

65.0%

0%

100%

200%

300%

400%

500%

600%

700%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Pensions Charter School Tuition Special Education

Avg Tuition Rate Growth from 2007-08

12.9%

37.7%

13.6%

44.7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Regular Education Special Education

Avg tuition rates

Regular - $9,266

Special - $19,003

Avg tuition rates

Regular - $11,309

Special - $24,200

Charter Tuition Payments & Enrollments

8.6%

34.7%

77.6%

91.3%97.4% 97.5% 98.8%

104.8%

15.5%

54.5%

104.2%

131.1%139.3%

149.4%

166.4%

193.6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

160%

180%

200%

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18

Charter School Enrollment Charter Tuition Paid

15.3%

3.9%

Governor’s Charter Reform Proposal: Funding

• Prioritizes charter school funding reform as part of the

budget proposal

• Proposes $280 million in savings to school districts as a

result of changes to the tuition calculation:

• $147 million from savings in brick and mortar charter school

tuition.

• $133 million from savings in cyber charter school tuition.


Brick and mortar CS savings derived from:

• Moving from budgeted to actual total expenditures

• Excluding charter school tuition and CS ADMs from the tuition calculation

• Applying the SE category weights to the regular education tuition rate to target SE tuition to SE costs

• Category 1: 1.51 multiplier



• $147 million in SAVINGS (based on 17-18 data!)

• 326 school districts SAVE $

• 102 school districts no impact

• 71 school districts LOSE $s ($631k)


Cyber CS savings derived from:

• Setting a flat $9,500 rate for regular education (calculated annually based on CS costs)

• Applying the SE category weights to the regular education tuition rate to target SE tuition to SE costs




• $133 million in SAVINGS (based on 17-18 data!)

• 478 school districts SAVE $s

• 2 school districts no impact

• 20 school districts LOSE $s ($875k)


• Section 129: Charter schools may not advertise their

schools as “tuition free” and must indicate that tuition,

transportation, technology and other expenses are paid

for by taxpayer dollars.


Section 1525: Charter schools that have dual enrollment

agreements with institutions of higher education may not

profit from such agreements.

■ If parents pay tuition to higher ed. entity, district does not

pay the charter school

■ If charter school pays higher ed. tuition, school district

receives appropriate reduction in charter school tuition

Governor’s Charter Reform ProposalSection 1714.1: Clarifies power and authority of charter school authorizers specifically giving authorizers authority to:

■ Annually assess and evaluate academic performance and fiscal management of the charter school

■ Conduct a comprehensive review and evaluation of the academic performance, fiscal management, audit, governance and operations of the charter school

■ Access documents, systems, and facilities of the charter school and related charter school foundation or education management service provider

■ Develop or supplement model charter school application forms and renewal forms.

Governor’s Charter Reform ProposalSection 1715-A, 1716-A: Requires Charter School Trustees and Administrators to comply with public school ethics similar to public school district board members and administrators:

■ Each trustee and charter school administrator must file a financial interest form for the preceding calendar year by May 1

■ Charter school entities must comply with the Sunshine Act and post meeting agendas and minutes of their meetings on their publicly accessible website.

■ Prohibits family members working for the charter school or foundation that serves the charter school from serving on the charter school board of trustees

■ Trustees may not participate in the award or selection of any contract if they have a conflict of interest with the individual, company, or entity

■ Trustees may not provide loans, rent property, or provide products to the charter school entity they serve

■ Trustees may not receive compensation for their duties as a trustee member

■ A quorum of trustees must be present in order to conduct charter school business


Section 1715-A, 1716-A:

■ Half of the trustees must be appointed or selected by members of the residents of the community served by the charter school entity.

■ Trustees will be removed from the board if they commit a felony or violate any applicable law.

■ Board of Trustees will comprise 7 non-related voting members who are not family members. Board of Trustees must include:

1 public school educator who does not work for the charter school entity

1 parent/guardian of a student enrolled in the charter school entity

A member of the community served by the charter school entity


Section 1715-A, 1716-A:

■ Educational Management Services may not provide loans or lease property to the charter school entity

■ Employees of the charter school entity may not be supervised by an Education Management Service Provider

■ Educational Management Services must provide 1 year notice to terminate their agreement with the charter school entity

■ Educational Management Services that service charter school entities must post its salaries and other compensation of their employees on their publicly accessible website


Section 1719-A:

PDE will develop and publish a model application and renewal form for charter school entities that includes:

■ Roles and responsibilities of trustees and administrators

■ Standards of compliance for trustees

■ Details of Educational Management Services Contracts

■ Disclosure of conflicts of interest

■ Role of the Charter School Foundation, if applicable


Extra-Curricular Activities:

■ The school district of residence may charge the charter

school entity a reasonable amount for a charter school

student’s participation in the school district’s

extracurricular activities. The charter school shall not be

required to pay any cost not also paid by a student

enrolled in the school district for participation in the

extracurricular activity.


Section 1720-A:

Charter Schools may be renewed for up to 10 years. Denial of a 10 year renewal may not be appealed

Charter School Entity renewal may be for 1 – 5 years if the public school board or authorizer finds Insufficient data concerning:

The charter school’s academic performance

Governance and operations

Accepted standards of fiscal management and audit requirements


Section 1721-A:

■ Charter Schools Appeals Board my impose costs against any authorizing party that has engaged in arbitrary, dilatory, obdurate, or vexatious conduct in respect to any application, revocation, or renewal decision.

■ The Department and Office of General Counsel may also impose reasonable counsel fees and other taxable costs against a party in favor of the prevailing party in the appeal.


Section 1728-A:

Charter School Entities must fully comply with the Family

Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974

Charter School Entities must form an Audit Committee and

complete a certified fiscal audit annually including an

enrollment audit

The audit shall be made available on the publicly accessible

website


Section 1729.1-A:

Charter School Entities may consolidate into a Multiple

Charter School Organization.


Section 1731.1:

The State Board of Education will develop an

accountability matrix to evaluate:

Academic Performance

Operations

Governance

Accepted Standards of Fiscal Management

and Audit Requirements

Major Legislative Issues

78

Charter School Reform

■ The House has pursued a comprehensive

package which does not include funding reform: HB 355 (Reese) - Requires significant ethics reform similar to what is

required of administrators and board members in traditional public

schools. Prohibits charter schools from advertising their services as

“tuition free.”

HB 356 (Dowling) – Provides for right of first refusal, facilities for cyber

charter testing, and charters operating at more than one location.

HB 357 (Topper) – Comprehensive reforms dealing with charter

applications, charter amendment process, and charter facilities.

HB 358 (Marshall) – Provides for dual enrollment for charter students.

79

Charter Reform Cont.

HB 1897 (Sonney)

■ Different from HB 526 and SB 34

■ Requires all districts to operate a full-time cyber learning program by 2021-

2022

■ Mandates that districts offer two additional cyber learning options

■ Dissolves all Cyber Charter Schools by 2020-2021

■ A new amendment to HB 1897 is being developed

Charter Funding Reform Cont.

• A comprehensive charter school reform

amendment was attempted the week of

November 18, 2020 but failed to materialize.

• Provided for various policy reform and approximately

$35 million in cyber charter savings.

Property Tax Options

Plan 1: $8.62 Billion Reduction in School Property Taxes

1% personal income tax (PIT) increase to lower millage rates (rate rises to 4.07%)

1% sales tax (SUT) increase for homestead/farmstead exclusion (rate rises to 7% [8% in Allegheny County and 9% in Philadelphia])

Require school districts to levy minimum local earned income tax (EIT) of 1% (if they haven’t yet)

Expanding the Property Tax/Rent Rebate Program (PTRR)

Expand the Senior Safety net Deferred Property Tax Program


Plan 2: $6.437 Billion Reduction in School Property Taxes

The funding sources for this plan are still being calculated.

A PIT increase of 1.55% (from the current 3.07% to approximately 4.62%) would fund this change.

If the Sales and Use tax is included, the PIT rate would then be decreased accordingly.

Other funding sources could also be considered.


Plan 3: Rebate for Homesteads Capped at $2,340

According to the IFO, there are 3.4 million properties in PA that qualify as homestead properties. The statewide average school property tax paid by eligible homeowners is $2,340. The median school district property tax paid by eligible homeowners is $1,920.

This plan would provide a rebate to homestead properties that would be capped at $2,340. This plan would cost approximately $5.20 billion. The funding sources for this plan are still being calculated.

A PIT increase of 1.25% (from the current 3.07% to approximately 4.32%) would fund this change. If the Sales and Use tax is included, the PIT rate would then be decreased accordingly. Other funding sources could also be considered. Approximately 2.09 million homestead properties would see their school property taxes eliminated .


Plan 4: Rebate for Homesteads Capped at $5,000

According to the IFO, there are 3.4 million properties in PA that qualify as homestead properties. The statewide average school property tax paid by eligible homeowners is $2,340. The median school district property tax paid by eligible homeowners is $1,920.

This plan would provide a rebate to homestead properties that would be capped at $5,000 - This plan would cost approximately $6.86 billion. The funding sources for this plan are still being calculated.

A PIT increase of 1.65% (from the current 3.07% to approximately 4.72%) would fund this change. If the Sales and Use tax is included, the PIT rate would then be decreased accordingly. Other funding sources could also be considered. Approximately 3.11 million homestead properties would see their school property taxes eliminated.


Plan 5: $8.5 Billion Elimination in Homestead School Property Taxes

Every single homestead property in Pennsylvania would see their school property taxes eliminated.

The Personal Income Tax would rise from the current 3.07% to 4.82%. According to Appropriations Committee Staff, the baseline PIT rate would only need to rise to 4.65%, but 4.82% was decided because the rate was deemed sufficient to weather an economic recession.

1% sales tax (SUT) increase (rate rises to 7% [8% in Allegheny County and 9% in Philadelphia]).

The tax base would not need to be expanded

Act 82 of 2012 -Teacher and Principal EvaluationSenate Bill 751 of 2019

Positives:

• Makes classroom observation 70% of a classroom teacher’s evaluation and student performance data 30%.

• Makes 10% of building-level data part of a classroom teacher’s evaluation, with some adjustments for poverty, and 20% of a classroom teacher’s evaluation Teacher Specific Data.

• Makes observation 100% of the teacher’s evaluation for teachers and principals without building-level data.

• Principal’s evaluations, basing 70% of the evaluation on the evaluation rubric, 10% on building-level data, and 20% on goals set by the principal’s supervisor in consultation with the principal.

• Non-teaching professional employees without building-level data, evaluation is comprised of 100% observation.

Act 82 of 2012 -Teacher and Principal EvaluationSenate Bill 751 of 2019

Concerns:

• Teachers receiving a “Needs Improvement” rating, that rating is considered satisfactory, as is currently the case, but the period in which a second “Needs Improvement” constitutes an “Unsatisfactory” rating was reduced from 10 years to 4 years.

• States that the employer shall consider the documented input from the employee for inclusion in their performance improvement plan.

• Allows teachers to submit artifacts and evidence demonstrating the employee’s performance during the rating period, including “unanticipated barriers”.

• Allows administrators to evaluate a teacher evaluated as “Unsatisfactory” more than once in the same year, but not “Needs Improvement”.

• The “Gross Deficiency” Clause was not reinstated.

Right to Know Law Reform

• HB 283 (Simmons) – Provides for a fee for requestors

which intend to use public records to make a profit:

• Selling records, commercial solicitation, any other purpose which generates

revenue.

• Vexatious requestor discussions also beginning to take

place in the House and Senate.

Student Victims of Sexual Assault

• SB 530 (Martin) – The bill provides that when a student is

convicted or adjudicated delinquent of committing sexual

assault (on or off school property) upon another student

enrolled in the same school, the public school shall:

• Take one of the following actions for the student convicted or

adjudicated delinquent:

• Expel the student

• Transfer the student to an alternative education program

• Reassign the student to another school or educational program.

• Ensure the students are not transported together, educated in

the same school, or participate in the same activities.

Additional Important Issues

91

School Safety and Security Funding

■ On 2/26 the School Safety and Security Committee (Committee) established within the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) approved $53.7 million in school safety and security grants to 524 school entities and $7.5 million in community violence prevention/reduction grants to 30 organizations located throughout the Commonwealth.

■ PCCD also recently approved Cardinal Point Homeland Security Group as an alternative provider of NASRO training for school security personnel, and 2 more providers are in the process of being approved.

92

Upcoming Events

■ PSBA/PASA/PAIU Advocacy Day – March 23rd

■ PSBA and the American Institute of Architects (AIA) PA are

holding a 2 day joint conference entitled A Focused

Foundation: School Design + Construction Planning.

Role of safety and security in facility design, community input,

environmentally friendly design, PlanCon updates, financial

planning and grant opportunities, etc.

93

Check out

www.pacharterchange.org

For more facts and figures

demonstrating the need for

charter reform.

http://www.pacharterchange.org/

2020 State of Education

95

Timely issue for 2020 –

School district cyber Education programs

Questions?

96

Documents

The Future of Educational Policy in Pennsylvania · • Authorizing Statutes • Every Student Succeeds Act • Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ... ESSA Title II: $76