Government Relations Update Nancy Reder Deputy Executive Director NASDSE 2012

NASDSE Government Relations Priorities – Tier 1  IDEA implementation (including results work; fiscal issues; and development of reauthorization principles)  ESEA reauthorization (including waivers; assessments; teacher evaluations)  FY 13 appropriations  Data issues (including SPP/APR concerns)  Seclusion and restraint legislation  Common Core Standards  Technology (including virtual schools; accessibility and online learning)  Universal Design for Learning (UDL)

NASDSE Government Relations Priorities – Tier 2  Reauthorization of the Workforce Investment Act  Health care (Medicaid/other issues)  Career and Tech Ed  School choice (includes charter schools and vouchers)  Early childhood  Foster care (implementation of the Fostering Connections Act)  Respite care  ADA/504 issues

Overall Analysis of the Past Year

IDEA Implementation  SPP/APR indicators  Changes announced at OSEP Leadership Conference  Follow-up to final changes  RDA work  Fiscal issues (verification visits; funding)  Title 1/IDEA initiative  Full funding legislation  Going absolutely nowhere  Assessments (see ESEA reauthorization) No one in Washington is talking about IDEA reauthorization

ESEA Reauthorization – Glacier Hasn’t Moved (North Pole Is Melting Faster!!)

ESEA Reauthorization – In the House  H.R – Charter Schools bill -- passed the House  H.R – Flexibility in Using Federal Funds  H.R – Repeals ineffective or ‘unnecessary’ education programs to focus federal programs on quality programs for disadvantaged children  H.R. 3989, the Student Success Act and  H.R. 3990, the Encouraging Innovation and Effective Teachers Act  These four passed out of Committee; not sent to House floor

H.R – The Student Success Act (Title I)  Eliminates AYP – student achievement and turnaround around low-performing schools given to states and districts  States establish academic standards in reading and math and other subjects if they so choose  Annual assessments in reading and math, but not science  Maintains subgroups  States have flexibility to develop turnaround models  Codifies 1% alternate assessment without a cap

And in the Senate….

ESEA Reauthorization in the Senate  Bill marked up last October (bill number at last!! S. 3578)  Committee report issued just last week (1,285 pages!!)  Issues (still the same issues!!)  Accountability – no annual measurable goals  Continues subgroup disaggregation  Seven turnaround models  States need to set college and career-ready standards  What about the 1%/2% assessments?  No AYP – substituted continuous improvement  Highly effective teachers - not based on student test scores  Focus on lowest performing 5% of schools

Critical Issues  Highly effective teachers vs. highly qualified teachers  Alternate assessments/modified assessments (1%/2%)  Accountability approaches  Use of PBIS/RtI/multi-tiered interventions/UDL  Transferability of funds  Graduation rate calculations  What to replace AYP with?  Title I/IDEA working group recommendations – paper available at

Let’s Talk About Highly Qualified Teachers  What does the current law say?  ED’s position permeates all policies  Race to the Top  Waviers  Regulations  How did the CR change the definition of HQT?  Those in alt cert programs are considered highly qualified; CR asked for data collection on this  What will a new ESEA bill do?  Both Senate and House bills weaken HQT provisions/Kline bill eliminates it and sends it back to the state  How to reconcile with language in IDEA? No one seems to be thinking about this  HQT Coalition

NCLB Flexibility  35 states have been granted waivers (ID approved on 10/18)  States not applying for waivers: MT, NE, PA, TX, VT (withdrew), WY  IL, IO haven’t heard and CA wants a do-it-yourself model; 7 states recently applied  Documents posted at  Waiver is good for two years – could be an extension  Question: how will states move from waivers to new ESEA?  What will happen to waivers in a Romney Administration?

What Happens Now?

They Start All Over Again  New bills, new bill numbers

FY 13 Budget/Appropriations/ Sequestration

Budget/Appropriations – How It’s Supposed to Work  President submits budget to Congress  House passes budget resolution  Senate passes budget resolution  House and Senate pass 12 appropriations bills  Conference committees iron out differences  House and Senate vote on conference reports  President signs into law

What Happened This Year?  President submitted his budget pretty close to being on time – dead on arriva l  House passed a budget resolution (Ryan budget) cutting as much as 20% from nondefense discretionary spending  House passed 6 appropriations bills (Labor/HHS/Education didn’t get committee vote)  Senate did not pass any  Continuing Resolution passed through 3/27/13 – level funds everything

Now to the Dicey Stuff….. The Budget Control Act

Budget Control Act  The goal of the BCA is to reduce the deficit by $2.3 Trillion over 10 years through  Caps on discretionary spending ($841 B)  Sequestration if Congress approves budgets higher than specified amounts automatic cuts will happen  ‘Super Committee’ failed to come up with a deficit reduction plan (it had more latitude, e.g., raising taxes, cutting entitlements)  Failure of Super Committee triggers $1.2 T in sequestration cuts (but Medicaid is protected)  More info: orwww.cbpp.org

What Happens Under Sequestration?  $1.2 T includes cuts in spending and savings on national debt. Interest savings estimated at 18% of total; leaves deficit reduction target of $984 B  Divide $984 B by number of years ( ) = $109 B/year  Divide $109 B evenly between defense and nondefense spending – about $54.5 B for each  Remove exempt programs from calculation  Mandatory spending exempt or limited – Medicare limited to 2%  There are a few specific cuts to nondefense discretionary spending (e.g. from the ACA)

More on Sequestration  In FY 13, apply the remaining dollar number in equal percentage cuts across the board (approx. 8.2%)  For FY , lower the discretionary spending caps by the sequester amount (allows cuts to be made program by program)  If caps broken, automatic across-the-board cuts are triggered  FY 2013 sequestration goes into effect January 2, 2013  For programs like Title I and IDEA, cuts don’t happen until summer of 2013 because of forward funding of FY 13 funds. (Impact Aid cuts are immediate)

Potential Impact of Sequestration on IDEA (first year impact of BCA)  Would cut IDEA Part B $895.6M for FY 13  Would cut 619 $29.1 M  Would cut Part C $34.2 M  Would cut other special ed programs by $19.4 M

What Programs Are Exempt?  Short list (not exhaustive)  Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)  Some Pell grants  Medicaid  SNAP (food stamps)  Supplemental Security Income Program  TANF

Good Resources on Sequestration  AASA survey on sequestration: _Advocacy/files/AASA%20Sequestration%20Jul y% pdf _Advocacy/files/AASA%20Sequestration%20Jul y% pdf  NEA fact sheet: mpact_of_Sequestration_on_Education.pdf mpact_of_Sequestration_on_Education.pdf  Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:  Report from Senator Harkin (

Are Education Programs ‘Welfare Programs?’  Sen. Sessions said on 10/17 that a number of education programs are ‘welfare programs’  Rep. Ryan’s budget cuts education programs by 20%

So What’s the Fiscal Cliff?

Lame Duck Congress

What Congress Needs to do in the Lame Duck Session  Avoid the fiscal cliff  TANF needs to be reauthorized  Postal Service running out of money for pensions  And more…

Data Issues  New changes to the indicators announced at OSEP Leadership Conference  But changes already have to be made!  New data collection under CR regarding HQT

Seclusion and Restraint Legislation  Rep. Miller introduced H.R in April 2011 – has 56 co-sponsors  Sen. Harkin introduced S.2020, Keeping All Students Safe Act in December 2011 – no cosponsors  NASDSE has supported Miller bill – more concerns with Harkin bill  Biggest issues with this legislation  Prohibition on inclusion in IEP – Senate bill would also prohibit usage in behavior plans  Cost of training  Timing for contacting parent and holding meeting  Where do we go from here??

Common Core Standards (implementation and assessments)  No congressional activity  Our CCD Coalition has been looking at computer adaptive assessments and developed statement, which NASDSE supports

Technology (virtual schools, accessibility and online learning  Draft legislation has been prepared by the Alliance for Excellent Education  NASDSE’s Center on Online Learning and Students with Disabilities  NASDSE’s work with the Gates Foundation

Universal Design for Learning (UDL)  NASDSE participates in UDL Task Force and works closely with CAST  Best resource is CAST’s National Center for Universal Design for Learning:

What Moves Slower Than ESEA Reauthorization?

Reauthorization of Workforce Investment Act  The biggest issue seems to be what to do about sheltered workshops?  Poses problem for IDEA reauthorization because it has to come first

Health Care (including Medicaid)  Waiting for publication of final Part B Medicaid rule  Work with the NAME Coalition – key outside groups are NASDSE, AASA and CASE  Limited capacity to follow implementation of the Affordable Care Act but note that it will help individuals with disabilities in numerous ways  What is the potential impact of block-granting Medicaid on students with disabilities?

Career and Tech Ed  Nothing new to report at this time

School Choice (charter schools and vouchers)  Release last June of GAO report on charter schools and students with disabilities  Charter School ‘Summit’ at the Dept of Ed earlier this week  Critical issues  Enrollment of students with disabilities in charter schools  Capacity of charter schools to serve students with disabilities  Training for charter school authorizers and operators  Status of NASDSE work  Vouchers more active at state level

Early Childhood  Early Learning Challenge Fund: earlylearningchallenge/index.html earlylearningchallenge/index.html

Foster Care  Implementation of the Fostering Connections Act  NASDSE participates in foster care education coalition  Critical issue: who makes decisions about school placements for students in foster care – the IEP team of the child welfare worker who has responsibility under the Fostering Connections Act to keep child in home school or as close to home school as possible  NASDSE has asked for joint OSEP/HHS meeting

Respite Care  Member of National Respite Care Coalition and track activities through the Coalition

ADA/504 Issues  Concern remains regarding interpretation by OCR as to how 504 is applied in schools – OCR sees little, if any, differences between IDEA and 504  NASDSE working with OCR to set up regional conference calls between OCR regional offices and state directors of special education  United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – not on NASDSE’s ‘to-do’ list

Where to go for more information  Alliance for Excellent Education:  Center on Education Policy:  Common core standards:  Center for American Progress: