Committee members used the H.454 markup to revisit special education funding and program delivery. The Senate version removed House references to special education weights; the committee discussed what information AOE and JFO should report back, including drivers of extraordinary reimbursement costs, geographic mapping of specialized programs and metrics to assess whether delivery is responsive to student needs.

Members noted the House considered weighted funding proposals (citing Professor Tammy Colby’s modeling) but the Senate is not adopting those weights this session. Several senators asked for information the committee could use if it decides to consider weights in a future year, including the fiscal effect of potential weights, frequency of review and how implementation would shift funding between districts.

The draft asks for a report that includes: a geographic map of specialized programs, information the agency uses to support consolidation assistance to districts, an estimate of costs to provide consolidation support, and a review of extraordinary special education reimbursement drivers. Committee staff and JFO said some of the requested data already exist, while other analyses (for example, weighting models) may require outside expertise or additional time.

On program delivery and staffing, senators expressed concern that the bill’s reporting requirements should include analysis of staffing pipelines and whether current staffing levels support responsive special education delivery. The committee directed staff to refine reporting language and to prioritize metrics that would help evaluate program location, cost drivers and staffing challenges. No change to the current special education reimbursement mechanism (extraordinary reimbursement combined with census block grant) was adopted in the session.