Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Glad presses for mandatory IBASS submissions; debate centers on enforcement and department capacity
Summary
HB 1836 would require school districts to submit the input-based accountability system (IBASS) narrative that documents how districts meet minimum standards and academic frameworks. Sponsor Rick Glad proposed withholding some grant funds for non-submission; legislators and witnesses discussed whether withholding state aid is legally and administratively appropriate and emphasized the need for DOE staffing and technical assistance.
Representative Rick Glad opened testimony on HB 1836 by describing the state’s dual accountability tracks — a performance-based system (PEBAS) and an input-based system (IBASS) — and said the legislature needs the IBASS narratives to understand whether districts are delivering the components of an adequate education.
"A school shall demonstrate that it provides the opportunity for an adequate education under RSA 193 E2A," Glad told the committee, explaining the IBASS narrative asks districts to self‑report on subject-area staffing and curriculum implementation across K‑12.
Glad said the 2024 IBASS report showed most districts compliant but that a small number of districts did not submit narratives, and that some non-submissions were concentrated in a few administrative units that experienced leadership turnover. To create an enforcement mechanism he proposed withholding certain grant funds until a district files the required report; he said he would not suggest withholding core adequacy payments but rather grant monies tied to programs.
Senators and witnesses urged caution. Several argued that many reporting obligations already burden principals and district staff, and that failures to file were often caused by leadership transitions or by districts seeking technical assistance. Representative Lad and others pressed for a system of supports and clarified which reports are highest priority rather than defaulting to fund withholding.
DOE and former administrators at the hearing said IBASS is useful for identifying gaps (English language arts, technology, personal finance) and that the department previously relied on site visits and accreditation as partial substitutes; several witnesses proposed improving DOE staffing and helping districts complete high-priority reports on time.
What happens next: the bill’s enforcement language and whether and how to pair reporting requirements with technical assistance and departmental capacity-building will be central issues for amendment. Sponsors and the department will likely negotiate enforcement options that avoid unintended legal or fiscal consequences.
