Committee Summary for House Finance Division II (02/05/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
Unclear 00:03:19.159 - 12:01:40 PM	General Working Session	Unclear

Unclear: Melissa White, Division Director for Learner Support at New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only00:03:19.159 - 12:01:40 PM; Melissa White introduced the meeting and handed over to Kelly Rambo to discuss the various programs managed by the Department of Education, specifically focusing on nutrition programs. She highlighted the involvement of several team members present to discuss different aspects of these programs.
Unclear: Kelly Rambo, Bureau Administrator for Wellness and Nutrition at the Department of Education Information Only00:04:08.680 - 12:02:29 PM; Kelly Rambo provided an overview of the nutrition programs managed by the Department of Education. She detailed the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility, After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, Summer Food Service Program, and the Special Milk Program. She explained how these programs are funded, primarily through federal funds from the USDA, with some state supplemental funding. Rambo also discussed the reimbursement rates and provided a packet with detailed information on these programs, including federal and state funding allocations for the fiscal years 2022, 2023, and 2024. She addressed questions about the federal reimbursement rates and the impact of the programs, including the need for families to fill out applications to qualify for certain benefits.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:07:16.240 - 12:05:37 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the severe need lunch reimbursement and the process of determining federal rates. He also inquired about the differences in funding between breakfast and lunch programs and the impact of site qualifications on summer meal programs. He sought clarification on the state's role in matching federal funds and how the summer EBT program operates separately from the summer food service program.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:10:19.959 - 12:08:40 PM; Representative Murray asked about the fluctuations in student eligibility for free and reduced lunch programs and how this might indicate poverty levels. He also inquired about the coordination between the summer food service program and the summer EBT program, and how the state and federal funding interact. Murray raised concerns about the clarity of program funding during the budget cycle and sought to understand how the state matches federal funds for different meal programs.
Unclear: Representative Dy Information Only00:27:45.080 - 12:26:06 PM; Representative Dy asked about the impact of the USDA's decision to cover all meals during COVID-19 and whether meals were delivered to homes or if students had to come to school. He sought to understand the reasons behind the high federal funding during those years and how the return to income-based qualifications affected funding levels.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only00:49:30.440 - 12:47:51 PM; Caitlyn discussed the state special education funding program, previously known as catastrophic aid, which is now funded through the education trust fund. She explained the funding formula, which reimburses school districts for costs exceeding 3.5 times the average cost per pupil, with the state covering 80% of the costs above that threshold and 100% of costs above 10 times the average. She highlighted the manual process of reviewing invoices and determining allowable costs, and discussed the proration of funds due to a shortfall in the state budget. Caitlyn provided historical data on the funding and its impact on local district budgeting.
Unclear: Melissa White, Division Director for Learner Support at New Hampshire Department of Education Information Only00:03:19.159 - 12:01:40 PM; Melissa White introduced the session and mentioned that several people from the Department of Education were present to discuss various programs. She handed over the presentation to Kelly Rambo, who is responsible for the Office of Nutrition Programs and Services.
Unclear: Kelly Rambo, Bureau Administrator for Wellness and Nutrition at the Department of Education Information Only00:04:08.680 - 12:02:29 PM; Kelly Rambo presented detailed information about the Office of Nutrition Programs and Services. She distributed packets to the committee members, which included an overview of the programs managed by the office, such as the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility, After School Snack Program, and others. She explained the federal funding and state supplemental funds for these programs, and detailed the reimbursement rates for various programs from July 1 to June 30. She also responded to questions about federal reimbursement rates and the differences in funding for lunch and breakfast programs, clarifying that breakfast funding is meal-based, while lunch funding is a set amount.
Unclear: Representative Papic Information Only00:07:16.240 - 12:05:37 PM; Representative Papic asked about the two cents additional reimbursement for severe need lunches under the National School Lunch Program, to which Kelly Rambo responded that she was unsure of the federal algorithm behind it.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:09:33.839 - 12:07:54 PM; Representative Murray raised concerns about the confusion regarding the Summer Food Service Program and the Summer EBT program, noting that it was difficult for some to understand that the Summer Food Service Program does not cover meals during the summer, which places a burden on parents. Kelly Rambo clarified the distinction between the two programs and explained the process for accessing summer meal sites.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:13:16.320 - 12:11:37 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on whether all children would have access to summer lunches, to which Kelly Rambo explained that while some sites may not qualify, children can still access meals at open sites. She discussed the differences between open and closed sites and the application process for the Summer Food Service Program.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only00:49:30.440 - 12:47:51 PM; Caitlyn discussed the state special education funding program, previously known as catastrophic aid, which is now funded through the education trust fund. She explained the shortfall in funding and the formula used to determine reimbursements for high-cost special education students, which involves a cap of three and a half times the average cost per pupil. She also talked about the proration of funds when the appropriation is insufficient and mentioned the challenges in forecasting the required funding due to the timing of data collection.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only00:58:51.079 - 12:57:12 PM; Representative Hack Phillips inquired about the proration process and how it impacts the local districts' budget planning. Caitlyn explained that the proration amount is determined after the school year ends and that an estimate is provided to the districts in October for budgeting purposes.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only01:02:32.160 - 1:00:53 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the factors contributing to the significant increase in special education costs. Caitlyn mentioned that costs could be influenced by the pandemic and general inflation but noted the difficulty in pinpointing exact causes. She also discussed the limitations in evaluating the reasonableness of costs charged by service providers due to limited resources.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only01:07:54.039 - 1:06:15 PM; Representative Murray asked about the impact of legislation that would fund based on levels of disability. Caitlyn explained the federal monitoring requirements that would complicate such legislation and noted the neutrality of the department on this issue.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau Administrator for the Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:24:10.600 - 1:22:31 PM; Tim Carney presented information on the School Building Aid, Charter School Lease Aid, and SAFE Grants programs. He detailed the School Building Aid program, which provides state funds for school construction and renovations, explaining the competitive grant structure, the moratorium history, and how projects are ranked. He also covered the Charter School Lease Aid, which supports charter schools leasing buildings, and the SAFE Grants for school safety projects, funded by the Public School Infrastructure Fund.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only01:31:57.760 - 1:30:18 PM; Representative Hack Phillips asked about the possibility of paying off debt service early to reduce the tail of payments, to which it was explained that bonds cannot be paid off early like mortgages. He also inquired about the lapsing of the $50 million allocated annually for building aid, confirming that it lapses back into the education trust fund if not used.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only01:33:30.560 - 1:31:51 PM; Representative Papovich added context to the discussion about the complexity of bond payments and the difficulty in refinancing them early, suggesting that legislative time might be better spent elsewhere given the minimal return on early debt service.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only01:47:33.320 - 1:45:54 PM; Representative Murray asked about the impact of inflation on school building projects and how schools can account for it. Tim Carney explained that schools can update their construction costs at the time of project completion, which helps account for inflation.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only01:51:34.239 - 1:49:55 PM; Representative Hack Phillips inquired about the timing of Charter School Lease Aid distribution and whether there's a mechanism for returning funds if a school closes mid-year. It was clarified that lease aid is distributed once a year, and there's no mechanism for proportional returns if a school closes.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:53:13.760 - 1:51:34 PM; Caitlyn discussed the SAFE Grants, part of the Public School Infrastructure Fund, which was established in 2017 to support school safety, e-rate expansion, and small infrastructure projects. She explained the prioritization of school safety projects following significant school shootings and detailed the allocation of funds over the years, including the current waitlist of projects.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:13:16.320 - 12:11:37 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), particularly regarding the accessibility of food sites for children during summer. They questioned whether unqualified sites would prevent children from accessing meals or if they would need to travel to a less convenient location. The discussion highlighted the distinction between open and closed sites, with open sites being accessible to all children and closed sites limited to enrolled students. Representative Papovich also sought to understand the differences and coordination between the SFSP and the Summer EBT program, which provides electronic benefits to families.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:14:01.800 - 12:12:22 PM; The Department of Education Representative clarified that children can access meals at open sites near their homes if their usual site does not qualify. They explained that closed sites, such as YMCAs, serve only enrolled students. The representative also detailed the application process for site qualification and the differences between the SFSP and Summer EBT programs, emphasizing that SFSP provides meals at sites while EBT provides funds to families. They discussed the coordination between the programs through data sharing and a memorandum of understanding.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:15:32.120 - 12:13:53 PM; Representative Papovich continued to seek clarity on the SFSP and Summer EBT programs, focusing on the differences in qualifications and how the programs are coordinated. They were informed that the SFSP provides meals at sites, while the EBT program provides funds to families, and that both programs are separate but coordinated through data sharing and a memorandum of understanding.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:16:19.759 - 12:14:40 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained the differences in qualifications between the SFSP and Summer EBT programs, noting that SFSP sites can be open or closed based on their application, while EBT is managed by DHHS with specific qualifications. They discussed the coordination between the programs through data sharing and a memorandum of understanding, ensuring that both programs operate independently but in a coordinated manner.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:17:07.079 - 12:15:28 PM; Representative Papovich sought further clarification on the coordination between the SFSP and Summer EBT programs, focusing on how they ensure that both programs serve different groups without overlap. They were informed that the SFSP provides meals at sites, while the EBT program provides funds to families, and that both programs are coordinated through data sharing and a memorandum of understanding.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:17:52.160 - 12:16:13 PM; The Department of Education Representative clarified that the Summer EBT program is fully operational at DHHS and provides funds to families, while the SFSP provides meals at sites. They emphasized that both programs are separate but coordinated through data sharing and a memorandum of understanding, ensuring that families can qualify for both.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:18:37.520 - 12:16:58 PM; The Department of Education Representative presented a chart analyzing meals served under the National School Lunch Program from the previous school year, detailing federal and state reimbursement rates and total funding paid out. They highlighted that the chart was beneficial for understanding the program's budget and reimbursement structure.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:19:16.280 - 12:17:37 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the state lunch funding breakdown, noting that unlike breakfast, the state lunch funding was not broken down by meal type. They were informed that the state lunch funding is based on a match amount and a formula, and if a detailed breakdown was needed, it could be provided proportionally based on the number of meals served.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:20:01.440 - 12:18:22 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that the state lunch funding is based on a match amount and a formula outlined in RSA 189:111-a. They noted that while the state provides the same reimbursement for any type of lunch, a detailed breakdown could be provided proportionally based on the number of meals served if needed.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:20:49.320 - 12:19:10 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the differences between free lunch, reduced lunch, and state lunch, focusing on the qualifications and how the programs operate. They were informed that meal types are based on USDA regulations and poverty levels, while state lunch funding is a match amount independent of meal types.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:21:37.919 - 12:19:58 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that meal types are based on USDA regulations and poverty levels, with free lunch up to 130% of poverty level, reduced lunch up to 185%, and paid lunch for anything over that. They clarified that state lunch funding is a match amount independent of meal types, and that all states participating in USDA programs must have a state match.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:22:23.919 - 12:20:44 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the state's match for federal lunch programs, questioning whether the match was specific to each meal type or a general match across the program. They were informed that the match is cumulative across the entire program, not specific to any meal type, and that the state's match is based on a formula.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:23:09.559 - 12:21:30 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that the state's match for federal lunch programs is cumulative across the entire program, not specific to any meal type. They noted that the match is based on a formula and that the state had spent $800,000 on lunch matches the previous year.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:23:55.279 - 12:22:16 PM; Representative Papovich sought further clarification on the state's match for federal lunch programs, focusing on whether the match was cumulative or specific to meal types. They were informed that the match is cumulative and based on a formula, and that the state had spent $800,000 on lunch matches the previous year.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:24:42.159 - 12:23:03 PM; The Department of Education Representative confirmed that the state's match for federal lunch programs is cumulative and based on a formula. They explained that the state had spent $800,000 on lunch matches the previous year and that the match is allocated back to schools based on meals served in a specific month.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:25:27.320 - 12:23:48 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the state's budget lines for breakfast and lunch, focusing on how the state allocates funds for these programs. They were informed that the state's budget lines for breakfast and lunch are consolidated, with specific allocations based on the state's match for federal funds.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:26:13.559 - 12:24:34 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that the state's budget lines for breakfast and lunch are consolidated, with specific allocations based on the state's match for federal funds. They noted that the budget lines are allocated into specific classes, with class 601 for breakfast and class 602 for lunch.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:26:59.080 - 12:25:20 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the federal funding for USDA programs, focusing on the differences in funding across fiscal years. They were informed that the federal funding was higher during the COVID-19 period due to waivers, and that the state portion is included in the National School Lunch Program.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:27:45.080 - 12:26:06 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that the federal funding for USDA programs was higher during the COVID-19 period due to waivers, and that the state portion is included in the National School Lunch Program. They noted that the state portion is detailed on page seven of the document.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:28:33.159 - 12:26:54 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on the federal funding for USDA programs, focusing on the differences in funding across fiscal years. They were informed that the federal funding was higher during the COVID-19 period due to waivers, and that the state portion is included in the National School Lunch Program.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:29:21.120 - 12:27:42 PM; The Department of Education Representative explained that the federal funding for USDA programs was higher during the COVID-19 period due to waivers, and that the state portion is included in the National School Lunch Program. They noted that the state portion is detailed on page seven of the document.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:29:21.120 - 12:27:42 PM; The representative from the Department of Education discussed the intricacies of the state lunch program. They explained that the state lunch funding is based on a match amount and is not broken down by meal types like breakfast. They clarified that the state lunch program provides the same reimbursement for any type of lunch, and if a breakdown is needed, it could be done proportionally based on meals served. They also discussed the differences between free lunch, reduced lunch, and paid lunch, which are based on USDA regulations and poverty levels. The state lunch is independent of these categories and is a dollar amount for a match.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:19:16.280 - 12:17:37 PM; Representative Papovich inquired about the state lunch program's funding breakdown and the differences between meal types. They sought clarification on how the state lunch program operates and whether it could be broken down proportionally based on meals served. They also asked about the differences between free, reduced, and paid lunches, and how state lunch funding relates to these categories.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:20:01.440 - 12:18:22 PM; The representative further explained that the state lunch program's funding is a match for federal funds and not broken down by meal type like breakfast. They noted that the state lunch program provides the same reimbursement for any type of lunch, and if a breakdown is needed, it could be done proportionally based on meals served. They clarified that the state lunch is independent of the categories for free, reduced, and paid lunches, which are based on USDA regulations and poverty levels.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:20:49.320 - 12:19:10 PM; The representative discussed the state's lunch program further, explaining that it is a match for federal funds and not broken down by meal type like breakfast. They noted that the state lunch program provides the same reimbursement for any type of lunch, and if a breakdown is needed, it could be done proportionally based on meals served. They clarified that the state lunch is independent of the categories for free, reduced, and paid lunches, which are based on USDA regulations and poverty levels.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:21:37.919 - 12:19:58 PM; Representative Murray asked about the state's lunch program, specifically whether the state pays for lunch or only for breakfast. They sought clarification on the state's match requirements for USDA programs and how these funds are utilized.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:22:23.919 - 12:20:44 PM; The representative clarified that the state does pay for lunch, and the state lunch program is a match for federal funds. They explained that the state's match is cumulative and applies to both breakfast and lunch programs, ensuring that federal funds continue to be received. They noted that the state lunch program's funding is based on a formula and is allocated back to schools.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:23:09.559 - 12:21:30 PM; Representative Papovich sought clarification on which federal dollars the state is matching for the lunch program. They asked if the match is specific to meal types or a general match across the program.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:23:55.279 - 12:22:16 PM; The representative explained that the state's match for the lunch program is cumulative across the whole program, not specific to any meal type. They noted that the match is on top of the meal-based match for breakfast and is based on a formula that allocates funds back to schools.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:24:42.159 - 12:23:03 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the budget lines for state lunch and breakfast, seeking clarification on how these funds are allocated and whether the breakdown provided was accurate.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:25:27.320 - 12:23:48 PM; The representative confirmed that the budget lines for state lunch and breakfast are accurate and are allocated into specific classes in the budget. They explained that the state lunch match is in class 602, while breakfast is in class 601.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:26:13.559 - 12:24:34 PM; The representative discussed federal funding through USDA programs, noting the fluctuations in funding due to events like COVID-19. They explained that the programs on page eight are strictly federal funds, except for the national school lunch program, which includes a state portion.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:26:59.080 - 12:25:20 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the high federal funding during the COVID-19 period and whether it included meal delivery to homes. They sought to understand why all meals were covered regardless of income during that time.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:27:45.080 - 12:26:06 PM; The representative explained that during the COVID-19 period, all meals were covered regardless of income due to various reasons, including ensuring children received meals. They noted that the high federal funding was due to meals being reimbursed at the free rate, and the funding decreased as income guidelines were reinstated.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:29:21.120 - 12:27:42 PM; Representative Murray asked about the fluctuation in student eligibility for free and reduced lunches within school districts. They sought to understand if there is a significant change in the number of students qualifying or not qualifying over time.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:30:08.080 - 12:28:29 PM; The representative explained that there is fluctuation in student eligibility for free and reduced lunches, which depends on the number of applications filled out and whether students receive benefits through other programs like SNAP or TANF. They noted that there was a challenge in getting families to fill out applications after the COVID-19 period when they were not required.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:30:55.600 - 12:29:16 PM; Representative Murray asked if the data on free and reduced lunch eligibility could indicate rising poverty levels in school districts. They sought to understand if this data could be another track for monitoring poverty.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:31:43.360 - 12:30:04 PM; The representative noted that it is challenging to correlate free and reduced lunch eligibility with rising poverty levels due to fewer applications being filled out post-COVID. They explained that without sufficient applications, it's difficult to accurately assess poverty levels.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:32:28.960 - 12:30:49 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the organization of the free and reduced lunch eligibility report, expressing difficulty in navigating the data. They inquired if the report could be provided in a more user-friendly format like Excel.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:33:37.919 - 12:31:58 PM; The representative confirmed that the free and reduced lunch eligibility report could be provided in Excel format. They noted that the current report is organized alphabetically by district and school name, but acknowledged the difficulty in navigating it.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:34:29.399 - 12:32:50 PM; The representative introduced the Community Eligibility Program (CEP), explaining that it allows schools to offer meals to students at a certain percentage paid by the federal government, with the remaining portion covered by non-federal funds. They noted that the eligibility percentage was reduced from 40% to 25%, and discussed the challenges and benefits of the program for different communities.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:38:51.599 - 12:37:12 PM; Representative Papovich asked about the impact of reducing the eligibility barrier for the Community Eligibility Program from 40% to 25%. They sought to understand if any districts in the 25% to 40% range joined the program and the potential cost implications for local districts.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:39:38.079 - 12:37:59 PM; The representative explained that no districts in the 25% to 40% range joined the Community Eligibility Program due to the increased cost burden on local districts. They noted that the current administration is considering increasing the eligibility percentage back to 60%.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only00:41:09.920 - 12:39:30 PM; Representative Murray asked for a definition of 'household' in the context of poverty guidelines and inquired about potential ways to streamline the paperwork process for identifying eligible children. They sought to understand if there are ways to make the process easier for the Department of Education.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:41:55.280 - 12:40:16 PM; The representative explained that federal programs require paper applications, and while online applications could be an option, they come with a cost at the local level. They noted that there are limitations on what the state can do to help streamline the process, as it's largely a local decision.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:43:49.760 - 12:42:10 PM; The representative discussed the impact of nutrition program policy changes on adequacy funding, noting that changes in F&R (Free and Reduced) data can affect school funding. They advised considering these implications when making policy decisions and highlighted the local decision-making process regarding universal meals and application forms.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:45:24.280 - 12:43:45 PM; The representative discussed the allocation of federal Perkins funds for Career and Technical Education programs, noting that about $1.2 million goes to the Community College System. They explained the purpose of the Perkins Act and how the funds are distributed to support career and technical education across the state.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only00:46:10.880 - 12:44:31 PM; Representative Papovich asked for clarification on the Perkins Act and its purpose, seeking to understand how the funds are distributed and what they are used for. They also inquired about the allocation of the remaining funds after the community college system's portion.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:47:00.359 - 12:45:21 PM; The representative explained that the Perkins Act funds are used for developing Career and Technical Education programs in the U.S. They detailed how the funds are allocated, with $1.2 million going to the Community College System and the remainder used for administration, state programs, and distribution to regional Career and Technical Education centers.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:38:51.599 - 12:37:12 PM; The Department of Education Representative provided detailed information on various education funding programs. They discussed the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) program, explaining its benefits and eligibility criteria. They mentioned that lowering the eligibility barrier from 40% to 25% did not significantly increase participation due to the unchanged multiplier. They also touched on the intent of the program, which was to reduce the burden of applications and provide meals at no cost to students. The representative answered questions about household definitions and the administrative burden of federal programs, noting that local decisions affect the application process and funding.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:43:49.760 - 12:42:10 PM; The representative continued discussing the impact of policy changes on adequacy funding, emphasizing that changes in Free and Reduced (F&R) student counts could affect funding. They explained local decisions on offering universal meals and how these might impact the need for forms to secure additional funding. They also noted the state's role in monitoring these impacts and the need for local policy makers to consider these effects.
Unclear: Department of Education Representative Information Only00:45:24.280 - 12:43:45 PM; The representative provided information on the Career and Technical Education (CTE) program, funded through the Federal Perkins Act. They explained that the state receives about $6.9 million, with $1.2 million distributed to the Community College System. The rest is used for administration, state programs, and distributed to regional CTE centers, primarily serving high school students with some middle school involvement.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only00:49:30.440 - 12:47:51 PM; Caitlyn introduced a discussion on special education funding, highlighting the state special education funding program within the education trust fund. She explained the program's history, previously known as catastrophic aid, and how it moved from general funds to the education trust fund. Caitlyn detailed the funding formula, which supports local districts with high-cost students, and mentioned the shortfall in funding due to outdated data used for budgeting.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only00:52:35.760 - 12:50:56 PM; Caitlyn continued explaining the special education funding process, focusing on how the Department of Education determines reimbursements based on invoices and allowable costs. She provided examples of how the formula works, noting that schools submit costs at the end of the year, and the state then processes these to determine the proration of funds. She also addressed the historical trends of the funding and the challenges with proration.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:01:54.799 - 1:00:15 PM; Caitlyn discussed the practical implications of proration on local district budgets, explaining that districts receive estimates but actual proration is determined post-budget setting. She responded to questions about the forecasting of special education costs and the factors contributing to recent increases, such as the pandemic and general cost increases. She also addressed the department's role in evaluating invoice costs and the limitations due to funding and staffing.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:10:55.920 - 1:09:16 PM; Caitlyn provided further insights into special education funding, noting the small number of students it affects and the challenges in tracking costs throughout the year. She suggested involving business and special education administrators from school districts to provide local perspectives on the funding process. She also discussed the timing of invoice submissions and the impact of the proration on the funding cycle.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:16:21.000 - 1:14:42 PM; Caitlyn emphasized the need for real-time data to better manage special education funding and discussed the potential for legislative action to address funding shortfalls. She clarified that the department's ability to track and predict funding needs is limited by current staffing and resources. She also mentioned ongoing legislative efforts to address proration issues.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:24:10.600 - 1:22:31 PM; Tim Carney introduced the school building aid program, explaining how it provides state funds for school construction and renovation projects. He detailed the funding range from 30% to 60% based on community affluence, and the changes in the funding process since 2013. He discussed the competitive grant structure and the upcoming application cycle, highlighting the ranking process and potential unintended consequences of new rules.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:28:04.199 - 1:26:25 PM; Tim Carney provided a historical overview of the school building aid program, explaining the moratorium periods and the competitive process for funding. He detailed the current funding structure, including the obligation payments and new project funding. He also addressed questions about debt service and the lapsing of funds back to the education trust fund.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:34:18.840 - 1:32:39 PM; Tim Carney discussed the factors used to calculate school building aid rates, emphasizing the consideration of median family income and equalized value per pupil. He provided details on the ranking of school building projects and the process for schools to receive funding, including the impact of local bond votes on project funding.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:49:09.920 - 1:47:30 PM; Tim Carney explained the Charter School Lease Aid program, which provides lease assistance to charter schools. He detailed the 30% grant of annual lease payments, capped at $50,000 per year, and the funding source from the education trust fund. He also discussed the application process and the potential for proration if demand exceeds appropriation.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:54:02.079 - 1:52:23 PM; Caitlyn introduced the Security Action for Education (SAFE) grants, part of the public school infrastructure fund. She explained the fund's history and its uses for school safety, e-rate expansion, and small infrastructure projects. She detailed the prioritization of school safety projects following significant school shootings and the process for schools to apply for and receive these funds.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:57:55.599 - 1:56:16 PM; Caitlyn discussed the current status of the SAFE grants, noting that all funds have been awarded, and there is a waitlist of over $9 million. She explained the reimbursement-based nature of the grants and how funds are reallocated when projects are completed under budget. She also mentioned the ongoing need for schools to apply for new funding rounds.
Unclear: Caitlyn, Department of Education Information Only01:57:55.599 - 1:56:16 PM; Caitlyn from the Department of Education was concluding her discussion on the forecasting of special education costs. She explained that these costs fluctuate throughout the year and are influenced by various factors including the number of students, the services provided, and general inflation. She also mentioned the impact of the pandemic and the use of federal relief funds on special education funding.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:02:32.160 - 1:00:53 PM; An unnamed speaker asked Caitlyn about the significant increase in special education costs, inquiring if the department evaluates the reasonableness of the costs charged by service providers. Caitlyn responded that the department does not assess the cost but checks if the services billed are part of the student's Individualized Education Program (IEP). She also noted the impact of federal relief funds and the challenges in comparing special education services due to varying student needs.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:03:19.480 - 1:01:40 PM; The unnamed speaker continued to inquire about the department's capacity to analyze special education costs and the resources available for such analysis. Caitlyn explained the limited administrative funding from the state, which restricts their ability to perform detailed data analysis and invoice reviews. She highlighted that most administrative costs are covered by federal funding, and temporary staff are used for invoice processing.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:07:54.039 - 1:06:15 PM; The unnamed speaker asked about the potential impact of legislation that could base funding on levels of student disabilities. Caitlyn responded that such legislation would require significant monitoring and additional staff, and the federal government would demand double duty in monitoring to ensure proper identification of student disabilities for funding purposes.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:08:39.198 - 1:07:00 PM; The unnamed speaker discussed the need for more staff to perform detailed cost analysis and potentially reduce costs, particularly for out-of-state placements. Caitlyn agreed that more resources could help but noted the complexities and the lack of concrete data due to resource constraints.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:10:55.920 - 1:09:16 PM; The unnamed speaker asked about the timing of receiving special education expense data, suggesting that earlier tracking could help manage costs. Caitlyn explained that the legislation dictates the timeline for receiving such data, and with only 800 students across the state affected, there are no early warning flags.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:16:21.000 - 1:14:42 PM; The unnamed speaker suggested that if schools tracked special education expenses throughout the year, it could help the Department of Education better manage funding. Caitlyn agreed that real-time reporting could keep the legislature updated but additional authority would be needed to address cost issues.
Unclear: Unnamed Speaker Information Only01:17:55.840 - 1:16:16 PM; The unnamed speaker asked about the probation amount in special education funding, which Caitlyn explained depends on appropriations versus total expenses. She highlighted the challenges of level-funded budgets and the legislature's role in funding, noting that there's no open warrant for special education funding, which would require legislation to change.
Unclear: Tim Carney, Bureau of School Facilities Information Only01:24:57.000 - 1:23:18 PM; Tim Carney, the new administrator of the Bureau of School Facilities, presented on three programs: School Building Aid, Charter School Lease Aid, and Safe Grants. He explained the School Building Aid program, which funds construction and renovations, detailing the funding structure and the competitive grant process. He also discussed the Charter School Lease Aid, which provides lease assistance to charter schools, and the Safe Grants, which fund school safety projects under the public school infrastructure fund.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only01:31:57.760 - 1:30:18 PM; Representative Hack Phillips asked about the possibility of prepaying debt service to end the 'tail' of payments earlier. Tim Carney explained that bonds do not allow for early payoff like mortgages, and there's no mechanism for schools to pay off their bonds early. He also clarified that excess funds in the building aid program lapse back to the education trust fund.
Unclear: Representative Papovich Information Only01:33:30.560 - 1:31:51 PM; Representative Papovich added context to the debt service conversation, explaining the complexity of bond terms negotiated by school districts and the minimal return on legislative efforts to address this issue.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only01:38:11.400 - 1:36:32 PM; Representative Murray asked about the process if a community like Colebrook fails to pass a bond vote after being offered funding. Tim Carney explained that communities have three opportunities to pass their local vote, and if they fail, the department moves down the list to the next project.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only01:46:02.119 - 1:44:23 PM; Representative Hack Phillips inquired about the need for school facilities beyond the current $50 million cap per year. Tim Carney noted that the department was tasked with a state facilities assessment, but the funding for this was not approved, thus no progress has been made.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only01:48:21.280 - 1:46:42 PM; Representative Murray asked about accounting for inflation in building projects. Tim Carney explained that schools can update their construction cost per square foot when they start their project, but significant changes might not be fully accounted for.
Unclear: Representative Hack Phillips Information Only01:52:21.840 - 1:50:42 PM; Representative Hack Phillips asked about the distribution of Charter School Lease Aid and the possibility of funds being returned if a charter school closes mid-year. Tim Carney explained that the aid is distributed once a year, and there's no mechanism for returning funds if a school closes, as seen with schools that closed last year due to financial issues.
Unclear: Representative Murray Information Only02:00:17.199 - 1:58:38 PM; Representative Murray asked about the current status of the Safe Grants fund. Tim Carney explained that all funds are awarded, and there's a waitlist of $9.2 million for additional projects. The process involves schools applying, getting assessed by the Department of Homeland Security, and then receiving funds on a reimbursement basis.