Auditors and state board describe reforms at Utah Schools for the Deaf and Blind as lawmakers weigh pay‑formula change

Lawmakers at the Public Education Appropriations Committee heard auditors and the Utah State Board of Education outline reforms at the Utah Schools for the Deaf and Blind (USDB) and debated proposed changes to the school’s pay adjustment mechanism.

Jake Davis, who led the legislative audit, told the committee the audit focused on governance and financial management and found that the State Board of Education historically had not given USDB sufficient time or attention. "Insufficient oversight had allowed repeated financial and management issues for many decades," Davis said, citing similar problems identified in prior audits. The auditors recommended optimizing governance characteristics — ultimate authority, body composition, and adequate time and expertise — when the legislature considers long‑term structure.

USBE and USDB officials described corrective work underway since the 2025 session. Leanne Wood (vice chair, USBE and chair of USDB) and Darren Nielsen (USBE assistant superintendent assigned to function as USDB superintendent) highlighted actions including a standing oversight committee that meets monthly, an internal audit, standard operating procedures, policy updates, an expanded advisory council that now includes outreach parents, and a centralized outreach data system targeted for implementation by March 2, 2026. Nielsen said the data work is intended to address audit findings about unreliable outreach data and improve validation and reporting.

On compensation policy, the Legislative Fiscal Analyst recommended replacing a FY2027 steps‑and‑lanes salary increase with a standard statewide inflationary adjustment and moving to a five‑year review cycle, producing an ongoing reduction of $1,140,800. Presenters explained the weighted average salary adjustment (WASA) mechanism and its purpose: to keep specialized USDB educators competitive (in the statutory top 10 among districts) to avoid turnover that harms student continuity. Leanne Wood reminded the committee that "WASA is not a bonus; it's a market correction tool" designed to retain qualified educators who serve students with sensory impairments.

Ben Leishman (staff) identified technical budget and data issues that can create double funding for students who receive USDB outreach services while their LEA also collects weighted pupil units. Leishman recommended directing USBE to develop a fee‑for‑service plan to recover outreach costs from resident LEAs for implementation in FY2028 and moving USDB transportation funding into a distinct program to avoid unintended impacts on district transportation allocations.

Committee members debated the statutory model for governance and pay adjustments. Some legislators questioned whether the State Board of Education is the ideal long‑term governing body for USDB, given the board’s broader statewide responsibilities, and whether alternate governance structures should be considered. The auditors noted there is no single correct model across states but urged that whatever structure the legislature chooses include the key governance characteristics necessary to sustain oversight.

Next steps: the committee will consider statutory language (including House Bill 448 referenced by staff) and staff recommendations for intent language and technical budget re‑allocations. The board committed to reporting back on data‑validation fixes and on proposals to address double funding and outreach recovery by the committee’s interim deadlines.