Final
Categorical Funding Overview

SCHOOL FINANCE SYSTEM

Votes:
Action Taken:
<none><none>




02:04 PM -- Categorical Funding Overview

Deb Godshall, Assistant Director, Legislative Council Staff, provided a memorandum and walked through data on six categorical programs (Attachment ). She was joined at the table by Ms. Herrmann. She indicated that she would cover six categorical programs: transportation, the English Language Proficiency Act, small attendance center funding; the Exceptional Children's Educational Act for children with disabilities, the Exceptional Children's Educational Act for gifted and talented children, and vocational education.


02:07 PM

Ms. Godshall discussed what are allowable transportation reimbursements under state law and what are not. Current operating expenditures, defined in law, are allowable, but the purchase or lease of vehicles and most capital outlay expenditures are not reimbursable. Ms. Godshall reviewed the school district data provided in Table 1 in her memorandum. Representative King commented on the possibility of an incentive-based system for transportation funding. Senator Windels made additional comments on the data provided for unreimbursed transportation costs.


02:16 PM

Senator Anderson discussed the factors involved in a particular school district's transportation expenditures. The committee continued to discuss the costs involved for school districts, including the cost of fuel, a school district's fleet of vehicles, and the size of a district. Ms. Godshall continued her presentation by discussing the English Language Proficiency Act and reviewed the way that funding is distributed. Students are classified in one of three categories, "A", "B", or "C," according to their language skills, and allocations are based on these student classifications. Table 2 in her memorandum reflects the funding allocations for school districts.


02:25 PM

Senator Anderson asked Ms. Godshall and Ms. Herrmann about levels of funding for English language learners and the fact that some school districts do not apply for funding under the English Language Proficiency Act. Ms. Godshall continued the presentation by walking through data on small attendance center funding, which is reflected in Table 3 of the memorandum. Thirteen schools in 11 school districts received small attendance funding for FY 2004-05.


02:29 PM

Ms. Godshall reviewed the funding formula for special education under the Exceptional Children's Educational Act, which allocates funds to administrative units, either school districts or Boards of Cooperative Services (BOCES). School district funding data was provided in Table 4 of the memorandum. Representative King asked questions about reading the data on unreimbursed expenditures as a percentage of school finance funding. Senator Bacon commented on the distribution formula, and the portion based on the distribution for FY 1994-95. In response to questions from committee members, Ms. Herrmann indicated how the distribution would change if the current level of funding was distributed on a per pupil basis.

02:44 PM

Senator Tupa asked Ms. Godshall about the data provided for Boulder School District. The committee continued to discuss the outcomes of different potential distribution formulas. Ms. Herrmann provided an additional hand-out reflecting percentages and distributions of special education funding (Attachment ). Representative King described the current funding formula as a static formula. Senator Bacon brought up issues regarding the manner in which school districts were held harmless under the 1994 law change. Representative King asked further questions about the data provided in Ms. Herrmann's chart.


02:55 PM

As Ms. Godshall continued her presentation, she discussed the manner in which funding is provided for gifted and talented students and vocational education. Vocational education is not administered by the CDE, but rather by the State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education. Ms. Godshall reviewed the distribution formula with the committee. The final table provided in Ms. Godshall's memorandum, Table 7, indicates estimates of unreimbursed programs costs as a percentage of school finance funding by administrative unit.



03:02 PM -- Charter School Administrative Costs

Ms. Herrmann discussed charter school administrative costs, and reviewed the chart of accounts as it relates to these costs. She distributed four hand-outs (Attachments .... through ). Ms. Herrmann described the policies and procedures involved in accounting for charter school funding. In addition, she reviewed the at-risk calculation for charter schools. Statutory provisions ensure that at-risk funding follows the at-risk child served by the school district or the charter school. She discussed the applicability of the provisions for school districts that have retained exclusive chartering authority and have a percentage of at-risk pupils of more than 40 percent.



03:14 PM -- Status and Impacts of On-line Education Funding

Kent Tamsen, Director of Educational Technology, Colorado Department of Education, reviewed definitions and enrollment in on-line education in Colorado. He provided a hand-out (Attachment ) and was joined at the table by Ms. Herrmann. Representative King discussed the extra slots for on-line funding that had been provided for FY 2002-03. Ms. Herrmann discussed the resolution adopted by the State Board of Education and distributed a hand-out on on-line requirements and auditing issues facing the CDE. (Attachment ). She discussed the history of funding for on-line students and the current use of waivers for students who do not meet the eligibility requirements for a school district's on-line pupil count.


03:25 PM


Ms. Herrmann continued by discussing recent challenges to the statutory requirements for funding on-line students. She reviewed issues that have arisen because of interpretations of completion of a prior year's school work. Ms. Herrmann continued the presentation by discussing questions concerning the status a student who was not included in a school district's pupil enrollment or on-line enrollment for the prior year and did not complete a semester the prior year, but was also not a home-schooled or private school student the previous year. Ms. Herrmann said that varying interpretations of current statutory provisions for the on-line pupil count have confronted the CDE.


03:32 PM

Ms. Herrmann continued the discussion walking through several other statutory provisions, including those for transferring from a regular program in a school district to an on-line program in the district. She said that additional requirements for auditing have caused delays in meeting auditing requirements. She also raised issues concerning the negotiation that occurs when an on-line student wishes to enroll for one or more courses in a traditional school. The interpretation and issues that have been raised were discussed by the committee.


03:38 PM

Ms. Herrmann also noted that there are new efforts by on-line programs to set up "learning centers" across the state, which are not located in the school district or in a contiguous school district. In some circumstances, these learning centers have allowed the students to establish on-line membership by enrolling in the on-line school district's learning center and receive half-time funding. Senator Windels and Representative King asked further questions about the status of new learning centers and how they are being considered at CDE.


03:46 PM

Mr. Tamsen responded to final questions about the end of federal educational technology grants for the upcoming year. He confirmed that the grants were ending. This funding had been received by Colorado Online Learning (COL), the state's primary provided of supplemental on-line services. Senator Windels expressed her hopes that the committee would be addressing on-line issues.