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