Superintendents, business administrators and advocates told the Joint Committee on the Public Schools that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a central federal support for students with disabilities and that the state lacks resilience to absorb deep federal reductions.

Julie Borst, executive director of Save Our Schools New Jersey, reviewed IDEA’s history and funding levels. She said the law’s original funding goal (often characterized as 40 percent of excess costs) has never been met; recent federal funding for IDEA nationwide has been in the mid-teens percentage range (she cited roughly 14.7 percent as a recent national share). For New Jersey, Borst said Part B and C funding in the 2022–23 school year totaled about $410,500,000.

District examples:
- Manville: “The total budget for Manville is $49,000,000. Manville spends $7,700,000 on special education. The amount of funding that comes from IDEA this year is $500,000,” interim special‑services director Jim McLaughlin said, underscoring that the federal share is far smaller than district costs.
- Lenape Regional: Kara Huber, school business administrator, said Lenape serves 6,500 students and has 1,196 students classified for special education (18.4% of enrollment). Using the state funding formula she described, Lenape is not funded for about 167 classified students — a gap she estimated at roughly $3.6 million in state funding; the district also faced a $2.2 million shortfall in extraordinary aid last year and receives about $1.5 million in IDEA funds.

Witnesses warned of likely operational consequences if federal IDEA funding were cut: larger special‑education caseloads, fewer specialized staff (aides and clinicians), program consolidations, and increased litigation risk because districts remain responsible for proving compliance in court. Several presenters also highlighted that the state funding formula treats disabilities alike (a single per‑pupil multiplier) even though costs vary widely by disability, and that a tiered approach tied to need would better align funding to actual service costs.

Borst summarized the policy trade-offs: “Money matters,” she said, noting that many districts currently depend on a mix of federal, state and local funding and that sudden federal reductions would force painful programmatic choices. Committee members asked for district-level IDEA allocations and examples of how districts are currently using IDEA dollars.

No formal actions were taken at the hearing; committee staff asked presenters for the supporting spreadsheets and reports they relied on.