Blueprint for Maryland's Future - Alterations
SB 852 makes a series of changes to Maryland’s Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, with the largest changes focused on funding, educator career ladder rules, prekindergarten eligibility, and postsecondary readiness pathways. The bill repeals the Career Counseling Program for Middle and High School Students and its dedicated funding, while also changing how county boards report per-school funding for Blueprint programs and allowing a waiver from minimum school funding requirements for schools with 350 or fewer students.
The bill also narrows and revises parts of the Blueprint’s educator career ladder. It removes the administrator track from the statutory career ladder structure, excludes principals and assistant principals from the definition of “teacher” for these purposes, limits the Accountability and Implementation Board’s authority over collective bargaining matters unless specifically tied to the career ladder, and changes salary increase provisions so they apply to teachers rather than principals or assistant principals. It also reduces the State share of certain National Board Certification maintenance payments and requires a study on the effects of National Board Certification on teachers.
On the student services side, SB 852 expands the definition of a “Tier I child” for publicly funded prekindergarten to include children with disabilities and children from homes where English is not the primary language, and it adjusts priority rules for expanding prekindergarten slots accordingly. It also gives county boards limited authority to set family-income eligibility rules for payment of costs associated with one post-college and career readiness pathway, while preserving free access for students eligible for free and reduced-price meals. The bill keeps the Blueprint’s post-CCR pathway framework in place but adds flexibility around funding and access.
The bill further directs the State Department of Education to conduct an adequacy study on Maryland’s special education funding, including whether the current formula is sufficient, whether multiple weights should be used, and how transportation and nonpublic placements are funded. It also preserves and clarifies existing requirements that students who meet college and career readiness standards have access to college-preparatory, dual-enrollment, and career-and-technical pathways, while allowing temporary limits on some dual-enrollment course participation during the phase-in period.
Overall, the available context shows no recorded committee testimony or vote history, so there is no documented public sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s content, it appears to reflect a mix of cost-containment, structural simplification, and targeted expansion of student access, but it also makes significant changes to Blueprint implementation that could draw support from those seeking flexibility and concern from those favoring the original career ladder and counseling provisions.
SB 852 would amend multiple sections of the Education Article governing the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, including school funding formulas, the Accountability and Implementation Board’s authority, educator career ladder provisions, prekindergarten eligibility, and college-and-career readiness pathways. It repeals the statutory Career Counseling Program for Middle and High School Students, removes the administrator track from the career ladder framework, changes salary and certification provisions for educators, and adds reporting, waiver, and study requirements. It also affects county boards of education, the State Department of Education, the Accountability and Implementation Board, teachers, principals, assistant principals, prekindergarten providers, and students seeking dual enrollment or career pathways.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no direct record of debate, endorsements, or opposition in the supplied materials. From the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a substantial Blueprint revision that mixes expansion in some areas, such as prekindergarten eligibility and special education study, with reductions or restructuring in others, such as career counseling funding and parts of the educator career ladder. That suggests the bill may have appealed to those seeking Blueprint adjustments and fiscal or administrative flexibility, while likely prompting concern from stakeholders invested in preserving the existing implementation structure.
The most likely points of contention are the repeal of the Career Counseling Program and its funding, the elimination of the administrator track and related salary incentives in the career ladder, and the reduction in State support for National Board Certification maintenance. Another likely area of dispute is the bill’s limitation on the Accountability and Implementation Board’s authority over collective bargaining and its changes to school-level minimum funding waivers, especially for smaller schools. Education stakeholders, county boards, school employees, and advocates for Blueprint implementation, special education funding, and prekindergarten access would likely have differing views on these changes.