Transcript Highlights:

• state-level child welfare data.
• If, during placement number four or five or six or... ...happening to me and why, if during placement
• I don't have data.
• The data supports these changes.
• The data supports these changes.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing on a series of child welfare bills focused on DCF, foster care, mandated reporting, educational records, and family support. Chair Kennedy and Chair Livingstone opened with accessibility and testimony rules, then heard testimony on bills including S.127 on expanding mandated reporters, S.107/H.235 on a Foster Children’s Bill of Rights, S.106/H.228 on transferring foster care review from DCF to the Office of the Child Advocate, H.258/S.125 on an electronic backpack for foster children’s educational records, H.205 on kinship foster care background checks, H.246/H.266 on minimizing trauma in care and protection cases, and S.159 on support for families after sudden unexpected infant death. Supporters of the mandated reporter bill, led by Sen. Feeney and Foxborough advocates, described a local model that trains all adults who work with children and argued the state should scale that approach statewide to improve recognition and reporting of abuse. Testimony on the foster care bills emphasized the need for clearer rights, better notice to children and attorneys, stronger remedies, and independent oversight. Advocates, youth with lived experience, and legal organizations described placement instability, delayed notifications, abuse in care, poor educational continuity, and the need for rights around safety, family contact, culture, language, and access to records. Several witnesses urged that the Foster Children’s Bill of Rights include enforceable court remedies, not just reporting requirements. On the oversight bill, supporters argued DCF should not review its own foster care system and pointed to poor outcomes, high placement instability, and recent investigative reporting as evidence for moving review responsibilities to the Office of the Child Advocate. On the electronic backpack bill, testimony focused on the need for real-time data sharing and a centralized system so schools can receive foster students’ records quickly and support continuity. On the trauma-minimization bill, Rep. Miskin framed the proposal as a set of practical changes to reduce harm during removals and court involvement. On the SUID bill, Sen. Lovely said families should be given information about available grief and support resources after an infant death. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• can you know the residential placement can you know the residential placement or<00:19:19.840>
• , placement thing.
• Um, it's a placement, placement thing.
• data? data?
• I mean, there's the statewide data that you can see, but then there's the district-level data.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to approve the November 21, 2025 minutes, making several clerical corrections before adopting them as amended. The edits included adding the date, correcting a misspelled name, clarifying references to a scholarship fund representative’s title, removing an incorrect “DOE” reference, and fixing a few wording errors. The minutes were approved with one abstention from members who were absent. The bulk of the meeting focused on organizing the commission’s work under SB 57 and identifying which special education cost issues should be prioritized for research and reporting. Members discussed a long list of topics, including student referral rates, why students are classified as other health impaired, increases in referrals since school closures, interventions before referral, costs of non-medically necessary services in IEPs and 504 plans, differences between federal and state requirements, reporting of special education costs, out-of-district and residential placements, dispute resolution, Medicaid and insurance use, graduation rates, and adult learning participation. Several members emphasized the need to combine or narrow topics and to gather better data before the report due July 1, 2026. Representative Ames highlighted HB 742, which would eliminate prorated special education aid payments when state appropriations fall short, and explained that the Education Funding Committee recommended interim study. He argued that local districts are bearing too much of the cost and that the state and federal governments should provide more support. Other members raised concerns about rising special education identification rates, possible overidentification, school climate and mental health factors, bullying, staffing, speech therapy access, and residential placements. One member cautioned that DOE website numbers may be inflated or at least difficult to interpret because of how students are counted. Department of Education staff then explained how special education data and costs are monitored. They said student counts are tied to IEPs and SASIDs in the state system, districts are checked through both desk audits and on-site monitoring, and billed services are compared against IEP requirements. They also described IDEA funding, noting that most DOE special education staffing is federally funded, with a large share of federal money flowing through to local education agencies and the remainder supporting administration, monitoring, and training initiatives. Members discussed whether more staff and more robust oversight would improve accuracy and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is just 18 months of data.
• I have to sign off on these placements.
• placement so they can remain stable in their placement.
• Are we able to see that aggregated data?
• . based placement.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:26:07.919> three actually the highest placements three actually the highest placements
• a day and moving to another placement a day and moving to another placement that<00:40:09.200>
• youth in a non-traditional placement youth in a non-traditional placement eight<00:42:31.000>
• more had had more than one placement more had had more than one placement within<00:42:42.240>
• <00:48:02.200> and uh the trends looking at our data and uh the trends looking at our data

Keywords: 00:00:00 Introductions 00:00:22 Roll Call 00:01:56 Discussion on SB 85 00:14:03 Vote on SB 85 00:16:15 Explanation of Agency Amendment 00:19:04 Voice Vote on Amendment 00:19:33 Discussion on Kentucky Foster Children Housing, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 85, sponsored by Senator Meredith, which would move the Office of the Ombudsman from the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to the State Auditor’s office and make related cleanup changes. Meredith said the bill grew out of a prior task force and a two-year transition from Senate Bill 48, and he argued the move would create independence, improve access to the ITWIST database, ensure complaints are not lost in the handoff, and add confidentiality protections for whistleblowers. Auditor Allison Ball and her staff said the bill would codify access and procedures after earlier disputes and a court-mediated settlement, and they described the measure as necessary to make the new structure work effectively. Members asked how the Ombudsman would handle complaints and verify services in cases involving waiver recipients and other cabinet services. Ball and her staff said the Ombudsman would investigate complaints, make inquiries, and provide accountability outside the cabinet structure, with timelines and procedures similar to the Auditor’s office. The committee also discussed staffing and whether the office would need more personnel; Ball said the office already had about 100 people but could use more. The bill passed 10-0 with favorable expression. The committee then approved an agency amendment to administrative regulation 922 KAR 1:001490 concerning foster parent background checks. Cabinet staff explained the amendment corrected a drafting error by removing references to civil determinations in a second section of the regulation because the system cannot search those determinations, while still allowing the required checks under state and federal law. Senator Herron asked what a civil determination meant, and staff said it could involve a court finding in a custody or abuse case, though such findings are now typically handled through the child abuse and neglect registry. The amendment was adopted. Afterward, the committee began a discussion on Kentucky foster children housing and related issues. Ball and Ombudsman staff presented a preliminary assessment of children placed in office buildings, saying the review covered 49 children placed over a four-month period and showed a different picture than the public narrative of only older, high-acuity youth. They reported that some children had no documented behavioral or disability issues, many came directly from home, the average age was 13, the average stay was four nights, and placements were spread across several regions rather than centered only in Louisville. Members raised concerns about the lack of formal policies and procedures, staff safety, and how to ensure children are treated appropriately, and Ball said the Ombudsman was continuing a deeper review. No final action was taken on that discussion in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• can you know the residential placement can you know the residential placement or<00:19:19.840>
• um<00:44:24.240> student data feeds into our um student data feeds into our um student
• <00:45:46.000> is have to look at like once the data is have to look at like once the data
• , to get that data?
• I mean, there's the statewide data that you can see, but then there's the district-level data.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to review and amend the minutes from its previous meeting, correcting the date, several spelling and wording errors, and clarifying references to a scholarship fund and a member’s title. The minutes were then approved as amended, with some members abstaining because they were not present at the prior meeting. The chair then turned to the commission’s work plan under SB 57, emphasizing the need to prioritize the statutory topics and identify which issues require additional research, documentation, and possible spreadsheets. Members discussed a broad range of special education cost drivers and policy questions, including student referral rates, why students are classified as other health impaired, whether referrals increased after COVID school closures, intervention processes before referral, the cost of services required under IEPs and 504 plans, differences between federal law, state law, and DOE rules, reporting of special education costs, out-of-district and residential placements, district sharing of resources, dispute resolution, graduation rates, and adult learning outcomes. Several members raised concerns that school environments, mental health, bullying, and possible overidentification may be contributing to rising special education numbers and costs, while others cautioned that some reported district percentages may be inflated or unclear because of how the data are counted. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 742, which would eliminate prorated special education aid when state appropriations are insufficient and require the governor to draw a warrant to cover shortfalls. Representative Ames explained that the bill had been recommended for interim study because the commission is already examining special education costing, and he highlighted the gap between FY24 special education costs of about $977.1 million and state aid of $33.9 million for catastrophic aid, $67.4 million for differentiated aid, and $50.8 million in federal IDEA funds, leaving local districts to cover about $825.1 million. He argued the commission should ultimately make clear that both the federal government and the state should contribute more. The Department of Education, through Melissa White, answered questions about data and oversight. She said special education counts come from IEPs entered into the state system using SASIDs, that DOE monitors districts through both desk audits and on-site visits, and that billing is checked against the services listed in each student’s IEP. She also said DOE’s special education work is largely federally funded, with roughly $56.7 million received through IDEA this year and about $49.1 million flowing through to LEAs, while the department retains a small amount for administration and statewide support activities. Members also discussed how adequacy calculations use special education counts from the state system and how those figures are reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department attempted to locate respite placements to help stabilize him.
• Lucas has frequently disrupted placements has been repeatedly.
• Level. 4 is a clinically therapeutic level of placement.
• This slide outlines the steps taken to implement and bring this new placement option online.
• So the CDC has to pay for that child's placement when they're locked out.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Employment programs must offer more than just job placement.
• Cross-tabulating data about Black students and students with disabilities...
• This bill would require DESE to publish student data, including school discipline data, that is cross-tabulated
• When the data is broken down like this to reflect a student's multiple identities, When the data is broken
• Out-of-district placements are more expensive.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a hearing focused primarily on special education-related bills, with testimony centered on two major themes: transition planning for students aging out of school-based services at age 22, and the fiscal strain special education costs place on districts. Committee members explained hearing procedures, noted the House was in formal session, and periodically stepped out for votes while staff recorded testimony. A separate bill on special education due process was also taken up briefly, along with a bill on special education finance and another on equitable access/data reporting. On House Bill 752 and Senate Bill 313, witnesses from the Arc of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress, the Developmental Disabilities Council, families, self-advocates, and Senator Comerford described the “Turning 22” transition as a crisis point that often leaves families without adult placements, services, or clear communication. Testimony emphasized earlier planning, more accountability, better data collection, and a commission to improve coordination and residential placement. Several parents and advocates shared personal accounts of traumatic transitions, delayed placements, and the need for plans to begin at least a year before age 22. The committee later closed testimony on these bills after hearing from all signed-up speakers. House Bill 4217, on special education due process, drew support from Representative Sullivan-Almeida, parents, and advocates who argued that the burden of proof should shift from families to school districts. Testimony described costly legal battles, delays, and parents having to become experts in reading instruction or hire advocates and attorneys to secure services. Brody Dwyer, a 10-year-old student with dyslexia, and his mother described how evidence-based instruction helped him after years of struggle. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 546/Senate Bill 317, which would require DESE to publish cross-tabulated data on race, disability, gender, income, and other factors; advocates said this would better expose disparities and help address the school-to-prison pipeline. Finally, on House Bill 691/Senate Bill 430, school leaders, educators, and union representatives testified that special education costs are outpacing district budgets and that increasing circuit breaker reimbursement and creating a commission to study long-term sustainability would help prevent staffing cuts and service reductions. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee repeatedly closed testimony on individual bills as speakers finished and moved through the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm hopeful to get feedback with data-driven solutions to promote transparency and just real action.
• And so we've had tremendous success in building out that placement service array.
• Being over data, being over performance, all of those things.
• Our agency puts a high priority on kinship placement, and we're very successful with our kinship placement
• with our kinship placement numbers as well as stability.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee held its first meeting of the term and heard introductory remarks from the chair, vice chair, ranking member, and members, who broadly described their interest in child welfare, mental health, aging services, homelessness, and agency accountability. The chair then outlined the subcommittee’s jurisdiction, including child welfare, mental health and substance abuse safety net services, domestic violence, developmental disabilities, elder services, and child support, and introduced the Department of Children and Families (DCF) as the first agency panel for the term. DCF presented an implementation update on HB 7089, a 2024 law aimed at increasing accountability and transparency for community-based care (CBC) lead agencies that deliver most child welfare services under contract. The department said the bill was prompted by forensic examinations that found problems such as noncompetitive procurement, related-party transactions, excessive executive compensation, and weak financial oversight. DCF described new contract requirements and monitoring tools covering board governance and annual training, conflict-of-interest disclosures, financial penalties for noncompliance, fidelity bond requirements, limits on direct service provision by lead agencies, related-party procurement rules, procurement thresholds, real-property approvals, compensation caps, expanded public reporting, and a new Future of Child Protection and Funding Work Group. DCF reported that some lead agencies had completed required board training, others were still on schedule, and two agencies exceeding the direct-service threshold had been referred to the Auditor General. Members asked DCF about the reasons for the bill, the impact on children, the work group’s regional representation, aging-out youth, the Embrace Families transition, board training requirements, and whether enforcement actions had been taken. DCF said the bill was intended to protect funds for children and families and improve oversight, and clarified that the Central Florida lead agency contract was awarded through competitive procurement rather than an absorption. DCF also said the board training was designed to be meaningful but not overly burdensome, with timing left partly to lead agencies as they implement the new requirements. The committee then heard from two CBC leaders, who generally supported the accountability goals of HB 7089 and said their agencies had already addressed most of the new governance and disclosure requirements. They reported that board training had been completed or was being scheduled, but both agencies said the fidelity bond requirement has been difficult or impossible to obtain in the market as written, though they were able to secure the separate performance bond. The CBC witnesses also warned that recruiting providers is increasingly difficult, especially for higher-acuity children and group-home placements, due to limited provider supply, regulatory burden, insurance costs, and rising risk. They said these pressures are contributing to budget deficits in some areas and urged lawmakers to consider the funding model, insurance and indemnification issues, and the risk of overregulation reducing provider participation.

Transcript Highlights:

• and its relationship with student data and its relationship with student data privacy, privacy,
• . placement. placement.
• of district placement costs. of district placement costs. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
• you asking for that data from?
• Thank you. have um data like that to look at? have um data like that to look at?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission held an organizational meeting under SB 57 to study the cost of special education, with the meeting streamed publicly at the chair’s request. Members introduced themselves, and the chair explained that the bill creates two separate pieces, one dealing with SAU structure and the other with a commission on special education costing. He outlined his background in education and special education and said the commission’s work would focus on understanding and controlling special education costs. The commission reviewed its membership requirements and noted several vacancies or unfilled appointments, including the special education advocate, two governor-appointed parent advocates, and a Department of Health and Human Services representative. The members then elected Representative Rick Ladd as chair, Representative Dick Ames as vice chair, and Representative Megan Murray as clerk. Representative Ames briefly described his legal and policy background in disability and special education work in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. The chair then walked through the commission’s study topics, including referral rates by IDEA category, reasons for increases in categories such as autism and other health impairment, post-COVID referral trends, pre-referral interventions, Medicaid and 504-related costs, out-of-district placements, dispute resolution, billing practices, privacy, reimbursement, legal services, graduation rates, attendance, and adult learning. Members discussed how special education costs are distributed, noting that the state spends about $977 million annually on special education, with only part covered by state aid and the remainder largely borne by local districts. Testimony also noted that out-of-district placement costs have risen sharply since rate-setting changes around 2018, and that some categories may reflect changes in identification practices, medical factors, or broader population shifts. The commission agreed to continue reviewing the data and formulas in future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate that you track that data. we need the data.
• Number 15, some of the data points.
• Designate a lead agency on this no no single agency has any of the data, the complete data that needs
• You had the data, or the granularity of the data to be able to say, this variable caused this downward
• We do have some state-level data.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• because it's a medical placement. Um, because it's a medical placement.
• it's a medical placement. it's a medical placement.
• through that placement.
• forward for placement services etc. forward for placement services etc.
• bounds a placement for DHHS. bounds a placement for DHHS.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to continue its study of the cost of special education, with the chair emphasizing that the group needs to narrow its focus over the coming year toward specific cost drivers, including the IEP process, Medicaid, charter schools, and EFAs. Members reviewed a draft first report due November 1 and agreed it would be a brief synopsis of prior meetings, with minutes attached. The September 30, 2025 minutes were amended to correct the number of federally funded department staff from 234 to 23, and to revise language about Senator Sullivan’s comments so they reflected concerns about IEP advocates and fees charged to families rather than support for the concept. The amended minutes were then approved unanimously, with abstentions noted for members who were absent. The main presentation focused on how special education costs are handled for students attending charter schools. The DOE representative said there are 804 students with disabilities in charter schools across 88 of the state’s 176 districts, and that the district of residence remains responsible for all services and costs. She explained that students must meet IDEA criteria through district evaluation and parent consent, and that services are determined through individual IEP meetings rather than by a blanket charter-school decision. Members asked how those costs are tracked, whether any students are merely “monitored,” and whether districts separately identify charter-school special education expenses; the answer was that most districts fold those costs into their overall special education budget, though some may break them out as a line item. The discussion then turned to transportation and mileage costs for staff providing services at charter schools. Testimony indicated that districts may use their own staff, contract staff, or contract with a charter school for certified services, and that travel costs are often either built into contracts or absorbed as part of staff time rather than separately reimbursed. Members questioned whether mileage is reimbursed when staff travel to distant charter schools and whether those costs can be isolated in district budgets; the response was that practices vary by district and are not usually broken out by special education function. Several members argued this makes it difficult to determine the true cost of delivering special education, especially given New Hampshire’s model in which the district of residence pays regardless of where the charter school is located. The chair noted the complexity of the system and compared it to the state’s separate tuition and transportation approach for career and technical education centers.

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate that you track that data. We need the data.
• Number 15, some of the data points.
• Designate a lead agency on this no no single agency has any of the data, the complete data that needs
• You had the data, or the granularity of the data to be able to say, this variable caused this downward
• We certainly have data around that.

Keywords: budget, House Bill 1, public education, healthcare, border security, federal funding, spending limits

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on reviewing the proposed budget for the upcoming biennium, with substantial discussions around House Bill 1 and its implications for public education, healthcare, and border security. The Comptroller presented a revenue overview indicating a total of $194.6 billion available for general purpose spending, which reflects a slight decrease compared to previous years due to fluctuating economic conditions. Members raised questions regarding spending limits and the impact of federal funding on state programs, highlighting concerns about the sustainability of funding in light of potential changes at the federal level.

Transcript Highlights:

• . acceptance and placement.
• monitoring programs and placement. monitoring programs and placement.
• Data is the issue and data is the key.
• Senator Webb talked about data and the importance of data.
• <01:15:10.400> you data and the importance of data. you data and the importance of data. you

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard from the Justice and Public Safety Cabinet’s Grants Management Division on federal victim-services funding. Staff described the main grant programs they administer, including STOP VAWA, VOCA victim assistance, sexual assault services, Byrne state crisis intervention, and Project Safe Neighborhoods. They emphasized that VOCA is especially volatile because it is funded by the federal Crime Victims Fund, which has declined sharply in recent years, reducing Kentucky’s available awards and forcing cuts to state, local, and nonprofit subgrants. They also outlined steps the cabinet has taken to stabilize funding, including changing the subaward formula, aligning the grant period with the state fiscal year, subawarding one year behind the federal cycle, and retaining a reserve. Members asked about how funds reach victims, how subgrantee amounts are determined, and requested a breakdown of grant recipients and amounts; staff said they would provide that information later. The committee then received a detailed presentation from the Department of Juvenile Justice on alternatives to detention. Commissioner Randy White and staff explained that ATDs are short-term, less restrictive placements for low-risk youth, including electronic monitoring, home supervision, group homes, foster care, private child care, community programs, mentoring, evening reporting centers, and in-home wraparound services. They described the referral and approval process involving court-designated workers, detention alternative coordinators, courts, and county attorneys, and said DJJ currently has 16 ATD-related contracts, with placements, programs, and electronic monitoring among them. They also reported that between July 1, 2024, and July 30, 2025, 1,652 juveniles were involved in the process, including 168 diversion cases. Members questioned the cost of juvenile detention versus adult incarceration, whether families pay for electronic monitoring, whether there is a national model for juvenile detention, and what alternatives exist for truancy and contempt cases. DJJ said families do not generally reimburse for electronic monitoring, there is no single national model, and day treatment centers are an important alternative for some youth. The department also said it builds daily routines and wellness education into its facilities, and that more than two-thirds of its programs are evidence-based. Officials said they currently monitor vendor performance through quarterly reviews and can end contracts for poor performance, but that data tracking is still largely manual. They said the new JCOM system, now in pilot in the eastern region, should improve reporting and help identify outcomes and recidivism more effectively.

Transcript Highlights:

• unit is where you see um our placement unit is where you see um our placement costs<00:54:36.200
• on slide 20 um this is our our data on slide 20 um this is our our kinship<01:29:15.480> data
• In class line 26, I wanted to point out this is our data analytics service that scours the DCYF data
• <02:12:36.599> is children's uh placement is children's uh placement is contemplated<02:12
• <02:52:15.000> I dependent on institutional placement I dependent on institutional placement

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Division 3 House Finance Committee opened a work session and announced scheduling updates, including a second Medicaid work session on March 5 at 9:00 a.m. and a reminder that recommendations or budget amendments must be moved to the full finance committee by the end of March. Members were told no motions, roll calls, or votes would be taken, and the chair also reviewed upcoming meeting dates and weather-related cancellation procedures. The day’s presentation was a budget work session on the Division for Children, Youth and Families (DCYF), with officials Marie Nunan and Nathan White introducing the agency’s budget materials and mission. DCYF’s presentation focused on its core mandates and recent operational changes. Officials described child protective services, juvenile justice services, and the Sununu Youth Services Center, then highlighted workforce improvements, including reduced vacancy rates for assessment caseworkers, juvenile justice officers, and youth counselors. They attributed the staffing gains to legislative pay raises, mass recruitment posting changes, a more stable and trauma-informed model at SYC, and broader flexibility after prior budget cuts and hiring freezes. Members asked about full-time versus part-time staffing, and DCYF said most positions discussed were full-time, with some harder-to-fill part-time youth counselor roles at SYC. The committee also discussed DCYF’s emphasis on serving families earlier through its Community Navigator hotline referrals and community-based voluntary services, which are intended to connect families to supports before abuse or neglect escalates. Officials said the Community Navigator program had received 807 referrals since August 2023. On juvenile justice, DCYF described its assessment and diversion process and said it had reduced juvenile probation involvement by 30% from 2019 to 2023; members were directed to slide 17 for 2024 data, and officials said the trend continued toward fewer in-home juvenile justice cases. The agency also reported progress in kinship care, saying initial out-of-home placements with kin now occur 74% of the time and that kinship placements are associated with more reunification. Officials said kinship caregivers are being licensed and paid similarly to foster parents, and that the legislature’s kinship law has helped. Finally, DCYF outlined transition-age youth supports, including the HOPE program, Youth Villages LifeSet, and housing vouchers. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um if that participant's data.
• Thus, publicly disclosing data, business data, without an owner's knowledge.
• Right now, the data in opposite.
• 13.51 in the Data Practices Act.
• that missing to get that missing data. that missing to get that missing data.

Bills: HF3676, HF2959, HF3233

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Transcript Highlights:

• ><00:26:29.840> we<00:26:30.080> have system of data collection, we have system of data
• send kids in out of district placements. send kids in out of district placements.
• We don't use it for placements because placements are educational services.
• data data in.<01:30:47.440> With<01:30:47.760> that in.
• There's a lot of data out there.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee opened its second meeting on House Bill 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and discussed whether to also examine differentiated aid within the adequacy formula. The chair said the committee had previously heard from HHS/Medicaid officials and now wanted to hear from local special education directors about how the aid system works in practice, including billing, training, data collection, and whether districts handle claims consistently. Members also referenced Arkansas as a possible comparison state and said they hoped to develop ideas by November to address the current funding process. Committee members focused on the current special education aid thresholds and the impact of proration. The chair described the existing formula as requiring districts to absorb costs up to 3.5 times the state average per student, with the state paying 80% from 3.5 times through 10 times and paying above that, and said FY25 appropriated about $34 million while actual claims were about $50.1 million, leaving roughly a $16 million shortfall that caused proration. Members also raised the possibility of lowering the threshold to 2.5 times and asked how that would affect the number of eligible students and costs. Another member asked about how districts decide whether services are education-related or medical-related and how Medicaid or private insurance reimbursement affects later state aid claims. District representatives from Boothby Therapy Services, Bedford, and Guilford introduced themselves and described their roles. Guilford’s director said the district tracks students with paraprofessional support, nurses, transportation, or specialized programming, uses a data system to log every service touchpoint, and tries to maximize both Medicaid and special education aid; she said a lower threshold would likely capture all students with paras or nurses and that rising staffing and service costs would increase the number of students over the cap. Bedford’s assistant director said the district uses a different system, tracks roughly 60 to 80 students a year, and pursues Medicaid and special education aid simultaneously but does not pursue private insurance if it would affect FAPE; she said reducing the threshold to 2.5 times would likely double the number of qualifying students. Members asked follow-up questions about software, data entry, and how districts decide whether to bill Medicaid or seek state catastrophic aid, and the directors explained that their systems log services by staff type and student, with some districts using the same data for both Medicaid and state reimbursement claims.

Transcript Highlights:

• Data for total number of spots and demographic data on the nursing students does not provide detailed
• Today, the most recent data is from 2023.
• Striking a balance in legislation where more data is accessible to assist in placement for clinical nurses
• Striking a balance in legislation where more data is accessible to assist in placement for clinical nurses
• A handful of agencies have various items of data related to placement, but none to the clinical placements

Summary: The Senate Education K-16 Committee heard several bills before recessing to the floor, with most measures left pending subject to the call of the chair. SB 2986 would allow public schools and universities to permit after-hours facility use by religious groups on the same terms as other nonprofits, and SB 1032 would open the Governor’s University Research Initiative to private and independent universities; both had committee substitutes adopted and were left pending after brief testimony. Supporters of SB 1032 from Rice and Baylor said the change would help Texas recruit top researchers and strengthen the state’s research economy. The committee also heard SB 2058, which would require the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to publish annual data on nursing clinical training sites to improve placement coordination, and SB 2683, which would bar public colleges from giving benefits or recognition to student organizations that receive support from foreign entities of concern; both were left pending after testimony. A large portion of the meeting focused on SB 2233, which would require public institutions of higher education to adopt policies prohibiting students or employees on nonimmigrant visas from publicly supporting terrorist activity or organizations, with enforcement through investigations, reporting to Homeland Security, and possible Attorney General action and fines. The author said the bill was intended to reinforce existing federal definitions and campus safety, while senators questioned the bill’s scope, the definition of terrorist activity, and the clause tied to U.S. policy or practice. Public witnesses, including civil rights advocates, law students, and others, argued the bill was vague, overbroad, unconstitutional, and likely to chill protected speech and increase surveillance of international students and Black and brown communities; several Jewish witnesses also said the bill misused Jewish safety concerns and could be used for viewpoint discrimination. SB 2233 was left pending after public testimony. The committee then took up SB 735, which builds on prior Holocaust education legislation by funding optional age-appropriate and bilingual curriculum, museum field trips, teacher preparation partnerships, annual reporting, and regional collaboration with Holocaust museums and education service centers. The author and invited witnesses said the bill responds to survey findings showing uneven Holocaust instruction and a need for better teacher training and accountability. A fifth-grade teacher and the director of the Holocaust Memorial Museum of San Antonio testified in support, emphasizing the need for accurate, age-appropriate instruction and professional development. The committee recessed before finishing the agenda, and SB 735 was set to resume after the floor session.

Transcript Highlights:

• We got data from the courts.
• concern and<00:31:59.880> the<00:32:00.080> placement and the placement and the placement
• The next slide I want to talk about looks at data on relative and non-relative placements in foster care
• Data from our department also provides that placement with relatives provides greater overall and long-term
• relative and looks at data on relative and non-relative<00:52:33.640> placements<00:52:34.079>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a lot of different data out there, and slicing the data one way might show us that this person
• I think you have the data to perform that comparison with what you're doing here. Okay, thank you.
• My information was widely available because of data brokers spreading my personal information all over
• Senator Parker moves, and Senator Betancourt moves that the bill be recommended for placement on the
• HB 4145 be recommended and certified for placement on the local and uncontested calendar.

Bills: HB223

Keywords: municipal budget, county budget, local government finance, spending cap, expenditure limit, inflation plus population growth, taxpayer impact statement, budget transparency, property tax, fees, Legislative Budget Board, voter approval, disaster spending, fiscal restraint, Texas Local Government Code, city budget, county expenditures, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• DEDICATED TO GOING THROUGH LOOKING AT THIS DATA INFORMATION TO MAKE SURE IT IS QUALITY DATA, IT'S ACCURATE
• WE HAVE A LOT OF DATA ON OUR WEBSITE.
• DATA CHECK INS.
• WE ARE BY NO MEANS AN AGENCY THAT SITS ON DATA AND I WILL TELL YOU WE USE THE DATA AND INFORMATION THAT
• WE ARE INFORMING PLACEMENT.

Keywords: 999, senate, all