Transcript Highlights:

• Educational Adequacy Fund.
• of educational opportunity.
• the Educational Adequacy Fund as requested by the Department of Education.
• The Department of Education also receives general revenue, Educational Excellence Trust Fund, and Educational
• programs providing...

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then took up an interim study proposal on adult education and the Excel Center model. Representatives from Goodwill Industries of Arkansas, the Excel Center network, and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities testified that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED, and argued that the Excel Center provides a supported diploma pathway for adults who struggle with GED testing. Witnesses highlighted wraparound services such as free child care, transportation assistance, tutoring, life coaching, and career services, and cited outcomes including high retention, growing enrollment, and research showing higher employment and earnings and lower criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members raised questions about the state’s role, existing adult education programs, and how the study would be structured; the motion to adopt the ISP passed, though there was some procedural disagreement about when questions should have been taken. The committee then heard a detailed adequacy funding overview from BLR staff Katie Walden and Adrian Beck on Arkansas K-12 education finance. They reviewed national funding principles and explained Arkansas’s system, including state and local revenue sources, the Public School Fund, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and the Facilities Partnership Program. Staff said K-12 state and local revenues totaled $6.6 billion in 2025, with foundation funding making up the largest share of district and charter funding, followed by additional, categorical, and supplemental funds. They also explained the matrix-based foundation formula, the role of the uniform rate of tax, and how categorical and supplemental funds support areas such as alternative learning, English learners, special education high-cost cases, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked several follow-up questions about how specific funding categories are defined and used, including student support staff, instructional aides, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the inclusion of Excel Center amounts in state-local funding totals. Staff said some of those details would be addressed in a later presentation and offered to provide additional records, including district lists and historical information. The meeting ended after the funding overview, with no additional votes or actions beyond the ISP adoption and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• program, AB 1784 prohibits an institution of higher education from requiring a student to take a leave
• teacher preparation programs.
• teacher preparation programs or credential programs.
• This would have just offered the teacher credential programs for up to 40 programs, but programs that

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program. on page 24, somewhat offset by the $1 billion contingency funding for the education. savings
• Rider 78 includes $1 billion for the Education Savings Account Program.
• Rider 79 includes $4.5 billion for the Education Savings Account Program. $4.1 billion for increased
• And what percent of special education students are new to the program?
• I love. our magnet program I am afforded incredibly high quality education with incredibly high quality

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I would go for education because I became an educator somehow by accident.
• We have started our first apprenticeship program with our bachelor's degree in elementary education.
• , with the exception of limited access programs or teacher preparation programs.
• Program is four weeks in length. It is our commercial truck driving program.
• Our longest program is 24 weeks in length, and that is the full welding program.

Summary: The subcommittee began with an informal “college day” exercise in which members described what careers and colleges they would choose if starting over, often citing factors such as program reputation, location, cost, graduation rates, employment outcomes, and family or personal interests. Members mentioned a range of possible paths including law, aviation, education, construction management, psychology, social work, criminal justice, nursing, intelligence studies, and the arts. Several also highlighted the value of historically Black colleges and universities, dual enrollment, and career/technical education. The chair used the exercise to frame the meeting’s broader focus on Florida’s higher education pathways and student outcomes. Dr. Kathleen Plinsky of Valencia College then gave an overview of the Florida College System and Valencia’s role in it, emphasizing Florida’s statewide articulation and transfer framework, open-access mission, affordability, and workforce alignment. She described Valencia’s record enrollment, high retention, large share of first-generation and working students, and partnerships such as Direct Connect to UCF, Osceola Prosper, and Open Door grants for short-term training. Members asked about guaranteed transfer, apprenticeships, enrollment trends, student demographics, out-of-state residency, county scholarship costs, dual enrollment outcomes, and barriers to expanding career dual enrollment. Dr. Plinsky said the system supports transfer and acceleration well, but funding constraints limit growth in some areas; she also noted that dual enrollment participation is high and that Valencia’s affordability and student support efforts have driven recent enrollment gains. Dr. Jim Clark of Florida State University followed with an overview of the State University System, describing its governance, performance-based funding, low tuition, and strong graduation and research outcomes. He highlighted FSU’s enrollment, research profile, transfer student success, FSU Health, the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, partnerships with K-12 schools and Tallahassee State College, and efforts to expand nursing and medical education to address workforce shortages. After the presentations, the committee heard from a panel on student acceleration and mobility: Shannon Mercer of the Department of Education explained the Office of Articulation, the statewide course numbering system, FASTER records, the 2+2 transfer model, specialized AA transfer degrees, and credit for industry certifications, military, medical, and law-enforcement training. Panelists from Kaiser University, Florida State University, and Pinellas County Schools described their institutions’ roles in transfer, advising, career pathways, apprenticeships, and dual enrollment. No formal votes or bills were taken up in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the literacy coaches program, we are allocating $235 million for local educational agencies to develop
• Lastly, for the math coaches program, we are providing a $250 million investment for local educational
• Additionally, the proposal includes a mathematics coaches and specialist grant program to help educators
• This grant program seeks to address a critical need in our education system by providing funds to LEAs
• The kit program is critical to the success of the School Meals for All program.

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• with other states for distance education with other states for distance education programs,<00:10
• The program is administered by the U.S. Department of Education. The U.S.
• So, my question is about the K 3410 on the preschool education programs.
• So, my question is about the K 3410 on the preschool education programs.
• Todd Allen, general counsel, deputy commissioner, Kentucky Department of Education. programs. programs

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call – 0:00:00 Workforce Pell Grant Update – 0:03:30 Extension Office Update – 0:33:25 Kentucky Academic Standards for Social Studies – 1:07:08 Early Literacy Outcomes – 1:32:20 Consideration of Referred Administrative Regulations – 1:58:30 Adjournment 2:13:13, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And Brian Underhill, last but not least, Brian does the FEFP, Florida Education Finance Program.
• And Brian Underhill, last but not least, Brian does the FFFP, Florida Education Finance Program.
• The Florida Education Finance Program, which I already mentioned, funds your public schools and your
• The Florida Education Finance Program, which I already mentioned, funds your public schools and your
• education programs in Florida to try to speak to the students.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting and received an overview of the Pre-K-12 education appropriations jurisdiction and base budget. Staff explained that education funding is driven largely by enrollment and per-student formulas, with most money coming from state and local sources. The presentation highlighted the major budget areas: early learning, the Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP), non-FEFP K-12 programs, federal programs, and the State Board of Education. Members asked about instructional materials funding and how scholarship students who return to public schools are counted and funded; staff explained that instructional materials remain in the base and that funding depends on survey timing, with districts ultimately funded through the enrollment count process. The committee then reviewed federal IDEA funding for students with disabilities. Department of Education officials explained how IDEA Part B funds are split between state set-asides and local educational agencies, and noted that Florida ranked fourth nationally in total IDEA Part B funding and received a 95% state determination for meeting IDEA requirements. They also described the bureau’s responsibilities, including monitoring, dispute resolution, instructional support, and the Hope Florida unit for ages 3 to 5. Members asked for more information on student performance outcomes and how the state measures success beyond compliance, and the department agreed to provide follow-up data. The final major topic was the Florida Diagnostic and Learning Resources System (FDLRS), including associate centers, multidisciplinary centers, and specialized centers for deaf/hard of hearing and visually impaired students. Presenters described services such as child find, family support, assessments, professional learning, accessible instructional materials, and technical assistance. Committee members focused on whether families and schools have equal access to services across the state, how IEP disputes and reevaluations are handled, and whether more support is needed for parents, teachers, and rural districts. FDLRS representatives said they do not write IEPs but help connect families to districts, provide training and assessments, and support compliance and data collection; they also emphasized staffing and resource needs, especially for low-incidence disabilities and multilingual family outreach.

Transcript Highlights:

• So first, we recommend aligning ELOP funding and funding for the After School Education and Safety Program
• So first we recommend aligning ELOP funding and funding for the after school education and safety program
• , are districts that hadn't historically had the after-school education safety program or 21st Century
• The After School Education Safety Program serves K through 8. Yeah, that's right.
• programs?

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• the education trust fund the education the education trust fund the education is<00:17:28.360>
• mological program.
• mological program.
• mological program.
• Representative Murray: Just to clarify what we did the other day regarding the adult education program

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first considered an amendment to add a new “Lakes” license plate to HB 2, with proceeds directed to the cyanobacteria fund for lake cleanup. Representative McGuire said the bill had already passed on consent and asked that it be included in HB 2; members discussed that it had also gone to the Senate. The motion to adopt the amendment failed on a 7-8 vote. The committee then took up an amendment imposing a 5% administrative fee on certain dedicated funds, with several exemptions for funds that could not legally or appropriately be charged, such as those involving federal money or bequests. Supporters said it would make the treatment of dedicated funds more consistent and raise roughly $31 million over the biennium for the general fund, while opponents questioned the number of carve-outs and who currently pays the administrative costs. The amendment failed on a 4-5 vote. Next, the committee reconsidered and then adopted an amendment changing the distribution of business profits tax and business enterprise tax revenue, reducing the share going to the Education Trust Fund from 41% to 30% and increasing the General Fund share. Supporters argued the Senate had overfunded the Education Trust Fund and that the change would help balance the budget without changing education spending levels; opponents said they could not support taking money from the Education Trust Fund. The amendment passed 5-3. The committee also adopted, by the same 5-3 margin, an amendment incorporating HB 741 language on open enrollment and student attendance in public schools, with supporters calling it House policy and opponents noting it had been a close, partly partisan vote in the House. Finally, the committee considered a change to the University System of New Hampshire budget that would reduce general fund appropriations by $40 million per year, offset in part by $15 million in previously approved unique dollars for a net reduction of $25 million per year. Supporters said the cut was necessary to balance the budget and that other options had been exhausted; opponents called it harmful to the university system and argued the committee should instead look to other areas, including education freedom accounts, for savings. The discussion continued, but the transcript excerpt ends before a final vote on the UNH item.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to start off with just reminding everyone of what the district workforce education programs
• offer: a large array of career and technical education programs and a variety of literacy programs that
• Those tend to be our rural institutions where the career and technical education programs are going to
• Those tend to be our rural institutions where the career and technical education programs are going to
• adult general education programs are able to do that.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee for Higher Education met to review Florida’s workforce and Florida College System funding models as part of budget planning. Chair Harrell opened by emphasizing the state’s growing focus on technical education and workforce pathways, and the committee first heard from Tara Goodman of the Department of Education on district workforce education. Goodman explained the programs funded through district workforce dollars, including career certificates, applied technology diplomas, registered apprenticeship, and adult general education, and described the model’s reliance on lagged enrollment, program cost weights, local tuition offsets, and supplemental factors such as disability services, GED testing, and minimum funding for small rural districts. She also noted federal support through Perkins and WIOA and said the model is used to determine unmet need and guide appropriations. In response to questions, she said health care programs are generally among the higher-cost offerings and may be supplemented by pipeline funds. The committee then heard from Kathy Hebda, Chancellor of the Florida College System, on the college system’s funding model. Hebda described the main funding sources, including the program fund, student success incentive funds, pipeline funds, tuition and fees, and performance-based incentives, and explained that the current model was developed by the 28 college presidents under legislative direction. She said the model uses a three-year average FTE, weights workforce enrollment more heavily than non-workforce enrollment, gives significant weight to completions, includes a small-college factor and regional cost differentials, and also provides targeted funding to bring colleges up to a floor based on per-FTE funding. Senators asked about colleges below the target, cost differences among programs, faculty salaries, and health insurance costs; Hebda said the model is meant to provide flexible operating dollars that colleges can use for those expenses, but specific salary and benefit decisions are left to the institutions. Seminole State College President Georgia Lorenz also testified in support of the college funding model, saying it holds institutions accountable for enrollment and completions, can be adjusted to reflect state priorities like workforce, and addresses differences in size and regional costs. No bills were voted on, and the committee adjourned after brief closing remarks thanking Seminole State College and the presenters.

Transcript Highlights:

• programming and social opportunities throughout the state. fully able to access all educational programming
• The Marion Institute's education program effectively delivers farm-to-school programming to over 12,000
• The Mass Fresh Grant has awarded nearly $2 million to 67 schools and early education programs, but received
• The Mass Fresh grant has awarded nearly $2 million to 67 schools and early education programs, but received
• As we face a looming $200 billion cut to SNAP, programs that educate youth, support farmers, and promote

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on a large slate of bills, with the chairs emphasizing time limits, written testimony, and grouping similar measures together. Early testimony focused on opioid use disorder education in schools (S.382), with Senator Keenan arguing that students should be taught about the risks of substance use disorder and naloxone use as part of health curricula. Representative DeCost also briefly introduced H.551, a narrow bill concerning parent rights for children in third grade and younger. Several bills were then closed without testimony, including measures on type 1 diabetes informational materials and other diabetes-related proposals. A major portion of the hearing centered on school health and emergency response bills. Supporters of H.652/S.342 on diabetes management in schools described inconsistent district practices and urged clearer standards so students can receive care in classrooms rather than being sent out of instruction. Bills on epinephrine access and seizure disorders drew extensive testimony: advocates for stock epinephrine in schools argued that unassigned epinephrine can save lives and should be funded in a cost-neutral way, while a pediatrician opposed one version as an unfunded mandate. For seizure-safe schools (S.422/H.635), students, parents, educators, and advocates described missed or delayed responses to seizures, stigma, and the need for staff training, seizure action plans, and emergency medication protocols. A separate bill, H.645, allowing anti-seizure medication on school buses, was supported by a parent and student who said current law forces costly and restrictive transportation arrangements. The committee also heard testimony on youth skin health bills (S.334/H.600/H.619), which would let students carry and apply sunscreen at school and camp without a physician’s note. Supporters from melanoma prevention, dermatology, and industry groups said the bills would remove unnecessary barriers and promote sun-safe habits, while one witness cautioned about drafting details and unintended consequences. The hearing then moved to CPR/AED education for graduation (S.456), where Senator Tarr, a student advocate, and the Red Cross all supported requiring hands-on CPR certification for high school students. Finally, the committee took testimony on healthy school lunches (H.539/S.401): supporters from the Healthy School Lunch Coalition and school food directors backed stronger nutrition standards and a standing advisory council, while Consumer Brands Association witnesses opposed the bill as too vague and potentially disruptive. A nutrition scientist also warned about unintended restrictions on medically necessary or innovative foods. The chairs closed the hearing on the healthy lunch bills and then opened testimony on universal school meals for virtual schools (H.700), with Superintendent Patrick Latuka supporting access for students in Commonwealth virtual schools who currently receive no meal support.

Transcript Highlights:

• some special education teachers.
• some special education teachers.
• not special education.
• Are there any talks about general education programming possibly being targeted if special education
• when it comes to special education when it comes to special education programming<00:21:31.159><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Parents and educators have expressed how these programs have been able to support students thrive academically
• program.
• These programs and educators are important to me and to my community.
• government, now more than ever we need to fully fund the special education circuit breaker program.
• We have the CIRT program, and we've had this program for 32 years.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Ways and Means Committee held its final public hearing on the FY26 state budget, with chairs and members emphasizing that public testimony would help shape the budget and asking speakers to keep remarks brief. Committee leaders introduced members, explained the hearing process, and repeatedly thanked residents, students, and advocates for participating. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony focused heavily on education funding and the Chapter 70 formula. Students from Amherst, Northampton, Gateway Regional, Chester Elementary, and other districts described budget-driven cuts to electives, special education supports, paraprofessionals, counselors, transportation, and building maintenance. They urged higher Chapter 70 aid, increased minimum aid, rural school aid, and a reopening or restructuring of the funding formula, arguing that current formulas leave many districts unable to meet student needs and force local layoffs and overrides. Other speakers urged funding or protection for a range of programs and facilities, including the Louis D. Brown Peace Institute for homicide survivor services, the Museum of African American History, the Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and CART/interpreter services, the Access to Counsel housing legal aid program, the Department of Mental Health and Pocasset Mental Health Center, and Pappas Rehabilitation Hospital for Children. One speaker opposed offshore wind-related spending and urged a reset of the state’s energy approach, while another advocated ending the aircraft sales tax exemption. Committee members responded sympathetically to many speakers, asked a few follow-up questions, and several expressed support for maintaining or expanding the programs discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Department of Education federal guarantee agency for the Federal Family Education Loan Program.
• . federal family education loan program. federal family education loan program.
• We have some other teacher education-related programs that I want to just bring to your attention.
• the education program.
• In that regulation, we essentially eliminated the developmental education program and mandated the co-requisite

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Education met and approved the July 15, 2025 minutes before hearing a presentation from the Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Authority (KHEAA/KIA) on student financial aid ahead of the January biennial budget session. KHEAA outlined its role administering 17 state-funded grant and scholarship programs, 529 plans, and outreach services, and emphasized that net lottery proceeds after a $3 million literacy appropriation are statutorily dedicated to student aid. The agency focused on the major need-based programs—College Access Program (CAP), Kentucky Tuition Grant (KTG), and KEES—along with dual credit, Work Ready Kentucky, teacher scholarship, and National Guard tuition assistance. Officials said the new federal FAFSA methodology created a major increase in eligible students, especially for CAP, and thanked lawmakers for adding substantial funding this biennium to meet the higher demand. Staff explained that CAP is for Pell-eligible, low-income students, while KTG is a need-based grant for students at private Kentucky colleges; both use FAFSA data, but schools verify final eligibility. They said CAP awards are first-come, first-served and that the higher funding level allowed the program to last the full 21-month application cycle in FY 2024-2025, compared with much shorter periods in earlier years. KHEAA reported about $232 million spent on CAP for roughly 72,000 students last year, with current applications running about 10% ahead of the prior year. Members asked about the difference between applicants and recipients, the effect of lower lottery revenues, and whether recent federal legislation would affect state aid; KHEAA said it does not expect major impacts on grants and scholarships, though student loan changes could affect graduate students. The committee also discussed KEES and dual credit. KHEAA said KEES has been fully funded since its creation and that its forecast was within $76,000 of actual need last year. For dual credit, staff said a recent bill consolidated work-ready dual credit and career/technical education under one scholarship program, and KHEAA will seek growth funding because participation and costs continue to rise. The agency said FY 2025 dual credit spending reached $26.4 million across dual credit and work-ready funding, requiring transfers from Work Ready Kentucky to keep dual credit fully funded. Members asked about transferability of dual credit hours and whether the program reduces later college costs; KHEAA said it does not have hard data on every credit transfer, but it does see higher bachelor’s completion rates and lower student debt, suggesting positive effects. No votes were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• workforce need, if UC or CSU offers that program. ...if UC or CSU offers that program.
• Are there a sufficient supply of educators out there to start enacting these programs?
• And so high schools started to offer 13th and 14th grade adult ed educational programs one by one.
• And so high schools started to offer 13th and 14th grade adult ed educational programs one by one.
• Through the California College Promise Program, this initiative aims to increase access to higher education

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're mainly limited to the loan repayment assistance programs that the Office of Higher Education
• that the office of higher programs that the office of higher education<00:32:26.320> administers<
• The response was that these are not traditionally higher-education-related programs, but they are programs
• The response was that these are not traditionally higher-education-related programs, but they are programs
• c> but be higher education related programs but be higher education related programs but they're<

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Higher Ed Finance and Policy Committee met to begin a budget overview for higher education. The chair noted quorum, committee member introductions, and that Democratic members were absent. The chair also said the Office of Higher Education would not be appearing for the planned budget deep dive, so nonpartisan fiscal staff would present instead. Ken Savory, the committee’s nonpartisan fiscal analyst, introduced a presentation on the higher education finance structure and timeline. Savory explained the state budget cycle, the difference between direct appropriations, statutory appropriations, open appropriations, base funding, tails, and one-time appropriations, and how those concepts apply to higher education. He described the committee’s usual budget areas: the Office of Higher Education, Minnesota State, the University of Minnesota, and the Mayo Foundation. He also reviewed historical spending charts showing higher education’s share of the general fund over time, the 2/3-1/3 funding policy in statute, and how tuition and general fund support have shifted. He noted that the FY 26-27 base for the Office of Higher Education area is about $725 million, including roughly $450 million for the State Grant program and about $99 million for North Star Promise. Members asked about comparing the current budget to earlier biennia, and staff responded that they would need to calculate the percentage difference. The chair then summarized prior budget growth, saying the previous budget was about $650 million over base and the current budget/tail was about $450 million over base. Staff also reviewed the 2024 omnibus higher education bill, including a roughly $5 million reduction to North Star Promise that was redirected to the Fostering Independence Grant program and a $500,000 appropriation for Minnesota State’s Kids on Campus program. The committee did not take any formal votes or actions during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Providing students the opportunity to experience and explore health science education programs and careers
• Providing students the opportunity to experience and explore health science education programs and careers
• So our program at P.K.
• in college and university-approved post-secondary education programs to obtain either an AA or AS.
• this medical program.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education Postsecondary met to receive an update from Florida developmental research lab schools on articulated health care programs created under the Live Healthy initiative and Senate Bill 76. Chair Calatayud opened the meeting, confirmed a quorum, and heard presentations from P.K. Young/University of Florida, Florida State University Schools, FAMU Developmental Research School, and Florida Atlantic University Laboratory School. Each school described efforts to build K-12-to-postsecondary health care pathways, expand dual enrollment and industry certifications, and share replicable curriculum models with other districts. FSU Schools highlighted its HERO program, including CNA and food manager certifications, dual enrollment growth, reserve seating at colleges, and a paid internship with the Department of Health tied to emergency shelter operations. P.K. Young described its Healthy Lives Blueprint, which combines K-8 wellness experiences, a new high school health and human performance pathway, AP and science course expansion, a planned gymnasium redesign, and partnerships with Santa Fe College and UF. FAMU DRS reported growing dual enrollment, partnerships with FAMU, Tallahassee State, and Lively, and a goal of serving at least 100 students and 40 staff through health career exposure, certifications, and AA/AS pathways. FAU Lab School described a more advanced model that integrates elementary through high school research and health science experiences, including biotechnology, bioengineering, and partnerships with health and research institutions. The school reported 87 peer-reviewed student publications, more than $350,000 in student grants, six patents, and pipelines into FAU’s medical and nursing programs, including a Med Direct pathway and a National Merit Scholar pipeline. Committee members asked about student readiness for nursing programs, dual enrollment, articulation with state colleges, and how the lab school models could be disseminated statewide. The meeting concluded with praise for the programs and a motion by Senator Fine to adjourn, which was adopted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• programs for veterans, programs for students living with disabilities, programs for students experiencing
• It's called the CalWORKs recipient education program.
• The problem with the recipient education program is that there is too much red tape.
• I am a parenting student enrolled in the recipient education program at Moreno Valley College.
• The Strong Workforce Program was established in 2016 to strengthen career technical education programs

Summary: The committee first adopted its 2025-26 rules on a 7-0 roll call, then approved three consent items—AB 88, AB 240, and AB 313—on a due-pass motion to Appropriations. The hearing then moved to AB 648, which would give community college districts the same zoning authority as the UC and CSU systems to build student and staff housing on property they own or lease. The author and supporters argued the bill would help address severe housing insecurity and homelessness among community college students, while opponents and some members raised concerns about local control, zoning exemptions, and the impact on nearby communities. AB 648 passed the committee on a 5-2 vote and was sent to the Local Government Committee. The committee next heard AB 466, which would require California Community Colleges and CSU campuses to provide organ and tissue donor registry information during student orientation, and request UC campuses to do the same. Supporters shared personal stories about transplants and donation, saying college orientation is a good opportunity to increase registrations. Some members worried about information overload during orientation and suggested campuses have flexibility in how they present the material, but the bill advanced on a unanimous 7-0 vote to Appropriations. AB 326 followed, proposing campus-by-campus external audits of the CSU every three years and public release of the audits. The author, faculty supporters, and a student argued that systemwide audits do not provide enough transparency about how money is spent at individual campuses, citing examples of financial mismanagement and fee increases. CSU opposed the bill, saying it already conducts annual consolidated external audits and that campus-level audits would add cost without added benefit. After extensive discussion about transparency, audit scope, and implementation, the bill passed 6-1 to Appropriations. The committee then took up AB 335, which would create a California Black-Serving Institution Grant Program to support Black student success and broader underserved student services; supporters emphasized persistent equity gaps and low completion rates, while an opponent argued the bill needed to be carefully amended to comply with Proposition 209 and equal protection requirements. The transcript ends during that item’s discussion, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Arkansas educator prep programs, there were fewer individuals enrolled in and completing the programs
• Principals rated RPEP, the Arkansas Professional Educator Pathway, as the most effective program for
• In Arkansas educator prep programs, there were fewer individuals enrolled in and completing the programs
• And principals rated RPEP, the Arkansas Professional Educator Pathway, as the most effective program
• , and 86% were within 30 miles of an associate's degree education program.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.

Transcript Highlights:

• Infrastructure grant programs.
• , funding for these programs.
• , funding for these programs.
• All eligible students should have access to the program regardless of the educational model offered by
• I have the great privilege of coordinating the Homeless Education Services Program right here in the

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools, with the kitchen infrastructure grants, Tier 2 ELOP funding, and ongoing community schools funding as the main budget issues. For universal meals, the Department of Education and the Department of Finance supported continued investment in school meal infrastructure and explained that federal changes, inflation, and underreporting in meal counts could affect future funding. The LAO recommended rejecting a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure grants, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and that future funding should be tied to clearer goals and data. Several public commenters and school groups supported continued kitchen grants and universal meals, citing supply-chain delays, workforce needs, and benefits such as more freshly prepared meals and higher participation. For ELOP, the administration proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and an additional $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended fully fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579 and tying future changes to program requirements, while CDE supported the proposal and said the program is improving attendance and academic outcomes. Senators and witnesses discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, with concerns raised about accountability, flexibility, and whether the program should better serve older youth. CDE said new CalPADS reporting and the biennial report will provide more data soon, and public testimony largely supported stabilizing Tier 2 funding while also asking for more support for middle and high school students. For community schools, the Governor proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing sites, along with new accountability through annual self-certification and future accreditation. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger number of grantees. CDE strongly supported the ongoing funding and asked for additional support for county offices and technical assistance. Committee members questioned how accreditation would work for a model meant to be locally tailored, and administration staff said technical assistance would come first, with schools losing eligibility only if they failed to meet standards after support. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive of community schools, with parents, students, county offices, and advocacy groups describing gains in attendance, graduation, mental health supports, family engagement, and student belonging, while some commenters urged clearer eligibility rules, stronger reporting, and continued support for related programs such as MTSS and homeless student services.