Nonprofit residential and special‑purpose schools ask committee for statutory classification and faster reimbursements

Representatives of Wyoming’s nonprofit residential and special‑purpose education programs told the Select Committee they occupy legal and funding limbo that hinders students and providers.

Clark Fairbanks, director of the Wyoming Youth Service Association, said accredited nonprofit programs serving students with behavioral‑health, special‑education and residential treatment needs are not clearly recognized in statute and therefore are excluded from some state and federally administered pass‑through funding. "We don't have a clearly defined legal education classification which affects direct eligibility for many state and federal funds," Fairbanks said.

Speakers asked the committee to consider a statutory label—described in testimony as a 'non‑public special‑purpose school'—to acknowledge accredited programs that provide specialized educational, behavioral, therapeutic and residential services that cannot be fully met in traditional school settings. They also requested statutory clarification that would allow those programs to apply for and receive appropriate state education grants and pass‑through federal funds where eligible.

Witnesses described the current reimbursement model used to compensate these providers as slow and lagging: programs submit audited financials to a third‑party consultant, which produces an allowable‑cost analysis and leads to a reimbursement rate that can be set two years after the costs are incurred. Providers and program leaders said that delay has made it difficult to compete for staff after the state’s recalibration adjusted educator compensation in other settings; one witness said the program lost two teachers to local public districts following recalibration.

Sarah Cavaler, executive director of Teton Youth and Family Services, said the programs serve very high‑need students who often arrive academically behind and leave at or above grade level; she argued statutory clarity and faster, more timely reimbursement would improve student continuity, credit recognition and program stability.

Committee members asked whether providers should become LEAs (local education authorities); witnesses rejected that route, saying disenrolling students from originating districts would harm transitions and special‑education continuity. They urged a statutory classification that preserves students’ enrollment in home districts while clarifying providers’ eligibility for education funding.

The committee deferred directives and asked staff to include the providers’ recommendations in continued interim work.