Amended in Senate January 17, 2014

Amended in Senate January 6, 2014

Amended in Senate April 1, 2013

Senate Bill No. 596

Introduced by Senator Yee

begin insert

(Coauthor: Senator Beall)

end insert

February 22, 2013

An act to add Section 124174.7 to the Health and Safety Code, relating to pupil health.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SB 596, as amended, Yee. begin delete Multitiered end delete begin insert Pupil health: multitiered and integrated end insert interventions pilot program.

Existing law establishes a system of public elementary and secondary schools in this state, and provides for the establishment of school districts and other local educational agencies to operate these schools and provide instruction to pupils. Under existing law, the Superintendent of Public Instruction is required, among his or her other duties, to serve as the chief executive officer of the State Department of Education.

This bill would require the State Department of Education to establish a 3-year pilot program to begin delete provide multitiered interventions end delete begin insert encourage inclusive practices that integrate mental health, special education, and school climate interventions following a multitiered framework end insert in 4 schools, as specified. The bill would require the department to select schools begin delete that propose a model approach that provides preventive, targeted, and intensive interventions that target end delete begin insert where at least 60% of the student body is eligible for free or reduced-price meals or free milk in child nutrition programs and whose applications detail a model approach that targets end insert the behavioral, emotional, and academic needs of begin delete students end delete begin insert pupils with multitiered and integrated mental health, special education, and school climate interventions end insert . The bill begin insert , contingent on the enactment of an appropriation for this purpose, end insert would require the department to provide start-up and evaluation funding to each school participating in the pilot program begin insert , end insert and would require the schools to provide certain information to the department begin delete on an annual basis end delete begin insert in accordance with a comprehensive evaluation plan developed by the department and the State Department of Health Care Services to assess the impact of the pilot program and disseminate best practices end insert . The bill would require the department to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the success of the pilot program at the end of the 3-year period.

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

begin insert

begin insert SECTION 1. end insert   

end insert

begin insert Section 124174.7 is added to the end insert begin insert Health and
Safety Code end insert begin insert , to read: end insert

begin insert

begin insert 124174.7. end insert   

(a) The State Department of Education shall
establish a three-year pilot program in accordance with this section
to encourage inclusive practices that integrate mental health,
special education, and school climate interventions following a
multitiered framework. As used in this section, “department”
means the State Department of Education.

(b) The department shall establish the pilot program in four
schools that apply to participate through the submission of detailed
applications specifying their intended models. Geographical
distribution shall be ensured by locating the pilot program at two
schools in northern California and two schools in southern
California. The department shall select schools where at least 60
percent of the student body is eligible for free or reduced-price
meals or free milk in child nutrition programs and whose
applications detail a model approach that targets the behavioral,
emotional, and academic needs of pupils with multitiered and
integrated mental health, special education, and school climate
interventions. In addition to reflecting the school’s specific culture
and needs, a school’s model shall include all of the following:

(1) Formalized collaboration with local mental health agencies
to provide school-based mental health services that are integrated
within a multitiered system of support.

(2) Leverage of school and community resources to offer
comprehensive multitiered interventions on a sustainable basis.

(3) An initial school climate assessment that includes
information from multiple stakeholders, including school staff,
pupils, and families that is used to inform the selection of strategies
and interventions that reflect the culture and goals of the school.

(4) A coordination of services team that considers referrals for
services, oversees schoolwide efforts, and utilizes data-informed
processes to identify struggling pupils who require early
interventions.

(5) Whole school strategies that address school climate and
universal pupil well-being, such as positive behavioral
interventions and supports or the Olweus Bullying Prevention
Program, as well as comprehensive professional development
opportunities that build the capacity of the entire school community
to recognize and respond to the unique social-emotional,
behavioral, and academic needs of pupils.

(6) Targeted interventions for pupils with identified
social-emotional, behavioral, and academic needs, such as
therapeutic group interventions, functional behavioral analysis
and plan development, and targeted skill groups.

(7) Intensive services, such as wraparound, behavioral
intervention, or one-on-one support, that can reduce the need for
a youth’s referral to special education or placement in more
restrictive, isolated settings.

(c) Contingent on the enactment of an appropriation for this
purpose in the annual Budget Act or another statute, the
department shall provide start-up and evaluation funding to each
school participating in the pilot program in the following amounts:

(1) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) in year one.

(2) Two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) in year two.

(3) One hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) in year three.

(d) (1) The State Department of Health Care Services and the
department shall develop a comprehensive evaluation plan to
assess the impact of the pilot program and disseminate best
practices.

(2) Outcomes and indicators to be reported, pursuant to this
subdivision, by schools participating in the pilot project shall
include, but not necessarily be limited to, those already being
collected by schools, as well as designated measures of pupil
well-being, academic achievement, and school engagement and
attendance.

(3) (A) The department, in compliance with Section 9795 of
the Government Code, shall submit a report to the Legislature at
the end of the three-year period evaluating the success of the
program and further recommendations. The department shall make
the report available to the public, and shall post it on the
department’s Internet Web site.

(B) The requirement to submit a report to the Legislature
imposed under subparagraph (A) is inoperative, pursuant to
Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, four years after the
report is due.

(e) The Legislature finds and declares that pupils from all
backgrounds and circumstances in California deserve adequate
behavioral and academic support to achieve their full potential.
The Legislature further finds and declares all of the following:

(1) Pupils in California face relational and environmental
stressors that diminish their ability to achieve their full potential.
Among these complex challenges may be poverty, frequent exposure
to violence, placement in the foster care system, and other negative
experiences that result in chronic stress and trauma. Nearly
700,000 pupils in California receive special education services,
and nearly one-in-four youth are living in poverty. Nearly 60,000
youth are currently placed in foster care and as many as 20 percent
of youth are in need of mental health interventions.

(2) Pupils with these stressors are frequently failed by the
current policies and systems in place, as measured by indicators
for academic outcomes, social inclusion, emotional development,
mental health support, and general pupil well-being.

(A) In California, more than 20 percent of special education
pupils spend less than 40 percent of their day within their regular
classroom, an indicator of inclusion, compared to 14 percent of
special education pupils nationally and a federal target of less
than 9 percent.

(B) Only 59 percent of special education pupils graduated high
school within four years in the 2010-11 fiscal year compared to
76 percent of all pupils.

(C) Statewide, a recent study found only 58 percent of foster
youth in grade 12 graduated compared to 85 percent of all youth,
with nearly 14 percent of foster youth in grade 12 dropping out
of school.

(D) Far too often, youth with mental health challenges do not
receive the services they need. For instance, one study found that
nearly two-thirds of adolescents who experienced a major
depressive disorder in the last year did not receive treatment.

(E) Even by grade 3, low-income pupils perform substantially
below their higher income peers in areas of social and emotional
skill, social and emotional development, engagement in school,
and physical well-being.

(3) Current funding practices fail to adequately incentivize
schools to invest in front-end, preventative measures that would
reduce overall cost of special education.

(4) Delivery of comprehensive, community-based support and
resources requires a high level of collaboration between schools,
school districts, and county mental health agencies.

(5) Inclusive, multitiered systems of behavioral and academic
supports are essential to providing high-quality, cost-effective
special education programs that benefit all pupils.

(f) It is the intent of the Legislature that, upon demonstrated
success of the pilot program, the evaluated models can be adopted
by a large number of schools to increase the efficient and effective
utilization of available community resources in order to promote
the success of all pupils.

end insert

begin delete

SECTION 1.  

Section 124174.7 is added to the Health and
Safety Code, to read:

124174.7.  

(a) The State Department of Education shall
establish a three-year pilot program in accordance with this section
to encourage inclusive practices that leverage cross-system
resources and offer comprehensive, multitiered interventions.

(b) The department shall establish the pilot program in four
schools that volunteer to participate, two in northern California
and two in southern California. The department shall select schools
that propose a model approach that provides preventive, targeted,
and intensive interventions that target the behavioral, emotional,
and academic needs of students. In addition to reflecting the
school’s specific culture and needs, a school’s model shall include
all of the following:

(1) Formalized collaboration with local mental health agencies
to provide school-based mental health services that are integrated
within a multitiered system of support.

(2) Utilization of a designated percentage of a school district’s
existing special education expenditures to provide services within
the school setting.

(3) An initial school climate assessment that includes
information from multiple stakeholders, including school staff,
students, and families that is used to inform the selection of
strategies and interventions that reflect the culture and goals of the
school.

(4) A coordination of services team that considers referrals for
services, oversees school-wide efforts, and utilizes data-informed
processes to identify struggling students who require early
interventions.

(5) Whole school strategies that address school climate and
universal student well-being, such as positive behavioral
interventions and supports or the Olweus Bullying Prevention
Program, as well as comprehensive professional development
opportunities that build the capacity of the entire school community
to recognize and respond to the unique social-emotional,
behavioral, and academic needs of students.

(6) Targeted interventions for students with identified
social-emotional, behavioral, and academic needs, such as
therapeutic group interventions, functional behavioral analysis and
plan development, and targeted reading skill groups.

(7) Intensive services, such as wraparound, behavioral
intervention, or one-on-one support, that can serve as school-based
alternatives to a youth’s placement in a nonpublic school setting.

(c) The department shall provide start-up and evaluation funding
to each school participating in the pilot program in the following
amounts:

(1) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) in year one.

(2) Two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) in year two.

(3) One hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) in year three.

(d) (1) Each school participating in the pilot program shall
annually report to the department the following information:

(A) Number of youth referred to the coordination of service
team.

(B) Number of youth referred for assessment for diagnosis of
disability.

(C) Number of youth diagnosed with disabilities.

(D) Number of training hours and topics provided for teachers.

(E) Number and type of parent engagement activities.

(F) Number of youth served with targeted intervention.

(G) Number of youth served with intensive interventions.

(H) Annual teacher and school staff surveys assessing the impact
and satisfaction of services.

(I) Annual parent surveys assessing the impact and satisfaction
with services.

(J) Annual student surveys, completed by those participating in
intensive and targeted services, assessing the impact and
satisfaction with services.

(K) Annual school climate assessments, including multiple
stakeholder feedback.

(L) Number of youth referred to alternative school placements,
such as special day classes or nonpublic, nonsectarian schools.

(M) Number of school discipline referrals for the student body
as well as for those with disabilities.

(N) Attendance.

(O) Pre- and post- intervention assessments for students served
in targeted and intensive services using standardized tools
appropriate to targeted needs such as the Child and Adolescent
Needs and Strengths Assessment for social emotional-targeted
interventions and the Developmental Reading Assessment for
reading-targeted interventions.

(P) Progress made through annual Common Core standardized
testing.

(Q) Progress made among the student body and specified
populations in the Academic Performance Index, including students
with disabilities, foster youth, low-income students, and students
of ethnicities that experience disproportionate challenges to
academic achievement.

(2) (A) The department shall, in compliance with Section 9795
of the Government Code, submit a report to the Legislature at the
end of the three-year period evaluating the success of the program
and further recommendations. The department shall make the
report available to the public and shall post it on the department’s
Internet Web site.

(B) The requirement to submit a report to the Legislature
imposed under subparagraph (A) is inoperative four years after
the report is due, pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government
Code.

(e) The Legislature finds and declares that students from all
backgrounds and circumstances in California deserve adequate
behavioral and academic support to achieve their full potential.
The Legislature further finds and declares all of the following:

(1) Students in California face relational and environmental
stressors that diminish their ability to achieve their full potential.
Among these complex challenges may be poverty, frequent
exposure to violence, placement in the foster care system, and
other negative experiences that result in chronic stress and trauma.
Nearly 700,000 students in California receive special education
services and nearly one-in-four youth are living in poverty. Nearly
60,000 youth are currently placed in foster care and as many as
20 percent of youth are in need of mental health interventions.

(2) Students with these stressors are frequently failed by the
current policies and systems in place, as measured by indicators
for academic outcomes, social inclusion, emotional development,
mental health support, and general student well-being.

(A) In California, more than 20 percent of special education
students spend less than 40 percent of their day within their regular
classroom, an indicator of inclusion, compared to 14 percent of
special education students nationally and a federal target of less
than 9 percent.

(B) Only 59 percent of special education students graduated
high school within four years in the 2010-11 fiscal year compared
to 76 percent of all students.

(C) Statewide, a recent study found only 58 percent of foster
youth in grade 12 graduated compared to 85 percent of all youth,
with nearly 14 percent of foster youth in grade 12 dropping out of
school.

(D) Far too often, youth with mental health challenges do not
receive the services they need. For instance, one study found that
nearly two-thirds of adolescents who experienced a major
depressive disorder in the last year did not receive treatment.

(E) Even by third grade, low-income students perform
substantially below their higher income peers in areas of social
and emotional skill, social and emotional development, engagement
in school, and physical well-being.

(3) Current funding practices place the financial responsibility
for special education on school districts, failing to adequately
incentivize schools to invest in front-end, preventative measures
that would reduce overall cost of special education.

(4) Delivery of comprehensive, community-based support and
resources requires a high level of collaboration between schools,
school districts, and county mental health agencies.

(5) Inclusive, multitiered systems of behavioral and academic
supports are essential to providing high-quality, cost-effective
special education programs that benefit all students.

(f) It is the intent of the Legislature that upon demonstrated
success of the pilot program, the evaluated models can be adopted
by a large number of schools to increase the efficient and effective
utilization of available community resources in order to promote
the success of all students.

end delete