BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
296 (Solorio)
Hearing Date: 08/17/2009 Amended: 05/26/2009
Consultant: Dan Troy Policy Vote: ED 7-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 296 would require local educational agencies
that are required to offer supplemental educational services
pursuant to the No Child Left Behind Act to take specific
actions that are currently only suggested to be undertaken or
required to be undertaken only under specified circumstances.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
SES requirements Unknown, but
potential costs in the millions General*
* Counts toward meeting the Proposition 98 minimum funding
guarantee
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
Under the Federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), Title 1
schools that are in year 2 or beyond of Program Improvement are
required to provide supplemental educational services (SES) to
low-income pupils. These services are defined as tutoring and
other supplemental academic enrichment services that are
provided outside of the regular school day and are high quality,
research-based, and specifically designed to increase academic
achievement. SES providers must be approved by the State Board
of Education and may be public, private non-profit, or private
for-profit entities.
This bill, in an effort to better promote and improve access to
SES, would establish certain requirements of local education
agencies (LEAs) concerning supplemental educational services.
Specifically, this bill would:
Require LEAs to provide at least two methods by which
parents or guardians of eligible pupils may submit
completed SES enrollment forms.
Require LEAs to provide parents or guardians of eligible
pupils with information about the availability of SES
through at least two channels.
Require LEAs that offer school facility access to
outside entities outside of school hours to permit SES
providers the same access. The bill, however, does provide
that if space is limited, the LEA may limit access, but
only if the LEA governing board develops fair and
transparent policies for meting out facility space to
providers. The governing board would be further required to
develop policies for SES provider access that are
consistent with access provided to other groups, and make
these policies available to public comment prior to
adoption.
While these activities are not inconsistent with NCLB, they do
go beyond federal requirements. Technically, NCLB is not a
federal mandate but rather a condition for receiving Title 1
funds. By specifying the number of notifications LEAs must
provide, this bill may result in reimbursable mandate costs.
Given that over 1.4 million pupils attend schools that are in PI
year 2 or beyond, the costs of this mandate would likely be in
the low millions of dollars.
It is also possible, though not as clear, that the school
facility access provision could trigger reimbursable costs.
Currently, federal law requires schools that have not fully
obligated at least 20 percent of their funding for SES services
or school choice options must provide the same access to SES
providers as it does for other outside entities. This bill
extends the provision to schools whether they have unobligated
funds or not. If found to be mandate, the state could be
required to pay the costs for school board staff work related to
hearings and the development of required policies. However, as
school districts are authorized but not required to provide
school facility access to outside entities, it is possible the
Commission on State Mandates would not find this provision of
the bill reimbursable.