BILL ANALYSIS SB 331 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 4, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Felipe Fuentes, Chair SB 331 (Romero) - As Amended: June 23, 2010 Policy Committee: Education Vote:5-2 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No SUMMARY This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in collaboration with migratory parents, to develop and revise the state migrant education master plan after July 1, 2011, as specified. Specifically, this bill: 1)Specifies a child who has been identified as a "migrant child" may be deemed so for a period not to exceed three years, rather than five as stated in current law. 2)Requires, as part of the master plan for migrant education, the collection of specified data via the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and the Migrant Student Database (MSD), including preschool participation, academic achievement as measured by the state's assessment system, completion rates of courses required for admission to the state's university systems, suspension/expulsions, dropout and graduation rates, language status, and data related to pupil enrollment in alternative education programs. 3)Requires the annual migrant education program report, submitted by the state migrant parent advisory council (SMPAC), to include the following: (a) a program evaluation, (b) a review of annual needs and year-end assessments, (c) policy recommendations, and (d) the most recent data collected pursuant to this measure. 4)Requires the SPI to provide the migratory parent advisory council with training and technical assistance, no later than 30 days after the annual parent conference, on the preparation of the annual report. This bill also requires that training SB 331 Page 2 and technical assistance be provided free of charge to parents. 5)Requires interpretation be provided at each state and regional migrant parent advisory council meeting, as specified. FISCAL EFFECT 1)One-time GF administrative cost to the State Department of Education (SDE), likely between $150,000 and $250,000, to revise the state master plan for the MEP, as specified. This cost may be offset with federal MEP funds. 2)Annual GF/98 costs, of at least $144,000, to local education agencies to collect and report the additional data for this program, as specified. 3)One-time GF administrative costs to SDE, of approximately $100,000 to, to input and report the additional data required under this measure, as specified. 4)According to SDE, federal funds support all activities related to migrant education, including the cost of the annual parent conference ($69,000). Each of the 23 Migrant Education program (MEP) regions utilizes federal funding to support parent activities. To the extent, the requirements of this bill lead to increased parent training costs, there will be less MEP funds available for direct services to pupils. COMMENTS 1)Purpose . The federal MEP, authorized by the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, provides supplemental education services to address the educational needs of highly mobile children whose family members are employed doing seasonal agricultural work. Children are eligible to participate in the MEP if they or their parents or guardians are migrant workers in the agricultural, dairy, lumber, or fishing industries, and their family has moved for the purpose of finding temporary or seasonal employment during the past three years. Migrant students are eligible for program services from age three until they: (a) attain a high school diploma or its equivalent or (b) turn 21. Migrant students who are under age 21 but have not yet completed high school and/or do not attend a traditional school are referred to as "out-of-school youth." SB 331 Page 3 According to the State Department of Education (SDE), there were 211,510 migrant children in California in 2008-09. Of these children, approximately 144,000 received services under the MEP In 2007, federal law required the state to conduct a needs assessment of the MEP. According to the author, "The assessment points out that the data necessary to fully evaluate migrant students is not available. However, the data available does show that migrant students rate below their peers in nearly every performance indicator including drop out rates, English proficiency and standardized tests." The author further argues the SPI's statutory obligation to provide training to the SMPAC is not occurring nor is an annual report submitted to the Legislature on the status of the MEP. This bill requires the SPI, in collaboration with migratory parents, to develop and revise the state migrant education master plan after July 1, 2011, including utilizing data to evaluate the MEP, as specified. 2)Existing law establishes the federal MEP and requires the State Board of Education (SBE) to establish a master plan for services to migrant children. Statute requires the master plan to detail the types of instructional, health, and supportive services, including child care and transportation, provided to migrant children. In order to implement the master plan, MEP services are delivered through a regional system and each region is required to submit a plan to the SPI for approval. Currently, there are 23 MEP regions in the state. Current law also requires the SPI to establish a state migrant parent advisory council (SMPC) to participate in the planning, operation, and evaluation of the MEP. The SMPC is required to meet a minimum of six times a year to provide input on issues related to the program. The SPI is also required to sponsor an annual spring SMPC conference with the requirement that a report be submitted to the Legislature, SBE, the SPI, and the governor regarding the status of the program. 3)In 2006, the Legislative Analyst Office (LAO) completed a report entitled "Improving Services for Migrant Students" (2006) . One of the LAO's recommendations was to expand the SB 331 Page 4 current Migrant Student Database (MSD) to include more data elements. Specifically, the LAO recommended the MSD "contain optional fields for staff to input additional migrant student information, such as participation in bilingual education, and health issues that have been identified or are being treated (such as dental or vision needs)." The LAO stated: "Collecting consistent information on migrant students and sharing it across the state would ease students' transitions when they move to new schools as well as help create more coordinated statewide MEP services. This in turn would help meet the program goal of minimizing disruptions in migrant students' educational programs." This bill requires CALPADS, the state's comprehensive student data system, and MSD to collect specific data on the MEP. Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916) 319-2081