Transcript Highlights:

• something that they can revoke should the individual district trustees exhibit their independent judgment
• We also have the benefit of hindsight and being able to evaluate that if the Tulare County Board of Supervisors

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of local government and housing-related bills, with testimony often centered on regional coordination, permitting reform, and local control. SB 802 by Senator Ashby would require Sacramento-area jurisdictions to form a joint powers authority to coordinate homelessness and housing response; supporters argued the region has long lacked accountability and coordination, while Sacramento County, Folsom, and others opposed the mandate as an unprecedented state-imposed JPA. The bill drew extensive support from local officials, business groups, service providers, and advocates, and opposition from county, city, and nonprofit representatives who said a local process was already underway. Committee members expressed support for the concept, but the bill was held pending a quorum and later discussed again with strong encouragement for regional collaboration. The committee also heard SB 222, SB 677, SB 908, SB 226, SB 828, and SB 1193. SB 222 would streamline permitting for residential heat pump and water heater installations; supporters said it would lower costs and speed clean-energy adoption, while local government groups argued the main barrier is upfront cost, not permits. SB 677 would curb what the author described as abusive appeals and delays in affordable housing approvals, with developers testifying about frivolous subdivision map appeals and TEFRA hearing delays; the California Native Plant Society sought an amendment to preserve appeals on habitat lands. SB 908 would simplify permits for energy-code-compliant window replacements, and SB 226 would clarify financing authority for a West Sacramento baseball stadium proposal; both passed unanimously. SB 828, prompted by the Esparto fireworks warehouse explosion, would tighten fireworks storage and licensing rules, expand inspection and seizure authority, and increase fines; it also passed unanimously after testimony from fire officials and a pyrotechnic operator who opposed it unless amended. SB 1193, a county-specific Alameda County transparency bill, generated the sharpest debate. The author argued it would prevent waste, favoritism, and conflicts of interest in discretionary spending by requiring board approval, a public spending log, and clearer whistleblower procedures. Alameda County and county associations opposed it as overly broad and burdensome, saying existing processes already provide transparency and that the bill would reduce flexibility during fiscal stress. After committee questions about the bill’s purpose and the county’s current practices, the measure passed 7-0, with the author indicating willingness to accept an amendment restoring a four-fifths vote threshold. The committee then moved out of order to SB 1090, which would impose a temporary moratorium on state housing density laws in Altadena through 2030 in response to post-fire displacement concerns. The author said the bill is intended to protect long-term residents from investor-driven redevelopment after the Eaton Fire, while acknowledging amendments to align the moratorium with affordable housing development timelines. The transcript cuts off during the presentation of this bill, so no final action is shown for SB 1090 in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• I trust them to have the judgment to continue to elect responsible commissioners and council members
• By standardizing the data provided to the Legislature, we can better evaluate these programs and ensure

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for Army Sergeant Benjamin Pennington, the Pledge of Allegiance, and quorum and journal business before taking up the special order calendar. Several bills were explained and moved through amendment and final passage, including CS/SB 590 on the statute of limitations for mandatory reporters’ child-abuse reporting violations, which was clarified on the floor to apply prospectively only and passed 111-0. CS/SB 418 on law enforcement interactions with individuals with autism spectrum disorder was amended to align with the House version and passed 111-0. The chamber also recognized Spina Bifida Week and guests in the gallery before considering additional measures. Members then passed CS/CS/SB 1668 on the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association (NICA), described as preserving the program’s actuarial soundness, by a 112-0 vote; CS/SB 1246 on the Linking Industry to Nursing Education Fund, expanded to support broader health science education programs and non-health-care partner contributions, by 112-0; CS/CS/SB 1404 on memory care facility standards by 111-0; CS/CS/SB 1030 on recovery residences, including transfer-of-ownership and MAT-related provisions, by 168-0; CS/CS/SB 178 on athletics in public K-12 schools, allowing limited coach support for student welfare with parental consent and other guardrails, by 112-0; CS/CS/SB 422 on automatic dependent surveillance broadcasts, limiting use of ADS-B data for airport billing, by 108-2; and CS/CS/SB 598 on funeral, cemetery, and consumer services, modernizing licensure and exclusivity rules, by 111-0. The House also took up CS/SB 1134 on official actions of local governments and DEI-related restrictions. The sponsor argued the bill would prohibit counties and municipalities from official DEI actions and related funding while preserving numerous exceptions for holidays, observances, public safety, and other activities. Members asked extensive questions about how the bill would affect local programs, events, and offices, and Representative Gant offered an amendment to narrow the bill’s DEI definition by removing two prongs; debate centered on vagueness, enforcement, and local-government impacts. The transcript cuts off during consideration of that amendment, so no final action on the bill is shown. The session also included lengthy farewell remarks from Representatives Eskamani and Overdorf, reflecting on their service, staff, constituents, and policy priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• able to evaluate their outcomes.
• evaluations?
• In evaluation, is there a time limit on them?
• Legislatively mandated programs that are lacking evaluation.
• To my left is Josh Taffin, a Program Evaluator at the LFC.

Transcript Highlights:

• the pool to both do the full evaluation the pool to both do the full evaluation of<00:04:42.560>
• , >> So, once we've done the evaluation, >> So, once we've done the evaluation, determine
• Do you have an idea of what that evaluation will cost?
• that will be— >> Each building's evaluation, right?
• evaluation that will be >> each<00:10:01.760> building's<00:10:02.240> evaluation

Keywords: Call to Order: 00;15 Approval of Minutes: 01:22 Update on Generator replacement: 01:52 Update on Sheriff Fees: 13:28 Adjournment: 25:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fourth budget subreview session focused on personnel, public retirements, and finance. Members approved the minutes from the prior meeting and then heard from Finance Cabinet staff on two main items: a $7.5 million request related to generator systems and a sheriff’s fees budget request. The generator request was described as a preventive, life-cycle replacement and capacity-enhancement effort for 26 generators serving Frankfort-area state buildings, intended to protect continuity of government and expand beyond basic emergency power to support continuity of services. Members asked detailed questions about how many generators would be replaced, the cost per unit, the scope of the study, and whether the work could be phased. Staff said the $7.5 million would cover a full evaluation and any resulting engineering/replacement work, but the exact number of replacements was not yet known. They estimated the initial study would cost about $500,000 to $750,000, would take six to nine months once funded, and would produce building-by-building recommendations. Staff also said typical generator life cycles vary widely, often around 15 to 20 years but sometimes longer depending on run hours and usage. The committee then reviewed sheriff’s fees, with the Division of Local Government explaining that the state reimburses counties for several statutory sheriff-related costs, especially court security, which accounts for more than 90% of the claims. Staff said the current budget base is about $20 million, while actual spending has been running above $23 million, leading to a $3.5 million growth request to align the base with projected spending and reduce the need for non-general fund expenditure (NGE) adjustments. Members asked about claim volume, county participation, reimbursement controls, and whether the request reflected growth or underfunding; staff said all 120 counties submit claims, volumes have been fairly steady, and reimbursements are governed by statute and signed monthly certifications. No votes were taken on the requests, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• task force was charged with evaluating task force was charged with evaluating Kucky's<00:20:12.160
• We do the transcript evaluation.
• <01:00:04.960> The a re-evaluation is necessary. The a re-evaluation is necessary.
• adopted or if evaluation is necessary. adopted or if evaluation is necessary.
• child is having an initial evaluation. child is having an initial evaluation.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard presentations from the Family, Career and Community Leaders of America and the Governor Scholars Program. The FCCLA student speaker described how career and technical education helped her gain certifications, work in early childhood settings, and recognize a child who needed speech help, emphasizing support for CTE, FCCLA, and related student organizations. The Governor Scholars Program presentation, led by Dr. Jennifer Price with student speakers Max Corbett and Abigail Ziggler, focused on the program’s role in serving about 1,500 rising seniors each summer, its history since 1983, its statewide reach, and its impact on leadership development, college readiness, and keeping students connected to Kentucky. Members praised the students and program, and several shared personal stories about the program’s long-term benefits. Representative Camuel asked about funding, and Dr. Price said the program’s request was $2.1 million to maintain current enrollment levels of about 1,020 scholars for 2026; no vote was taken on that request during this segment. The committee then took up House Bill 498, sponsored by Representative Duvall, with Aaron Looper of Graduation Alliance testifying in support. A committee substitute was adopted after explanation. The substitute broadened eligibility for accredited providers to include public and nonprofit entities, allowed each county an opportunity to provide services with a $200,000 aggregate maximum per county, reduced the dollars per credit to serve more students, and made date corrections. Representative Duvall said the bill was a workforce measure developed from the Workforce Attraction and Retention Task Force and aimed at adults who lack a high school diploma but have two years or less remaining to graduate. Looper said the bill would create a pathway for adults to earn a regionally accredited high school diploma, paired with workforce and industry-recognized credentials, and stressed that it would not compete with GED programs, which are better suited for adults farther from graduation. He said the model is pay-for-performance, with providers paid only after milestones are completed, and that it would be available online, in person, or in hybrid form to improve rural access. In response to questions, he said students would not be charged fees, providers would handle transcript retrieval and remediation, and the program would include built-in accountability measures. He also said the budget request is $2 million per year, with the goal of maintaining the current level of service and eventually expanding if successful. Members asked about how the program differs from existing adult education options, access in all counties, and whether there are deserts in service availability; Looper said the online model and provider outreach are intended to address those gaps.

Transcript Highlights:

• To identify and evaluate children for special education services, the state follows federal and state
• consent is received, 35 more days to conduct the evaluation.
• the initial referral date for those evaluations, it does not The initial referral date for those evaluations
• , it does not track any information on referrals that did not result in an evaluation.
• and school districts are able to make that evaluation on their own for educational purposes.

Summary: The JLARC I-900 Subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on special education services, focused on comparing student needs, district identification practices, and funding. Auditors said Washington does not appear to under-identify any particular population for special education, though districts face ongoing challenges with identification, documentation, staffing shortages, and inconsistent referral tracking. They explained that their analysis used statistical models because the true prevalence of disabilities is unknown, and found Washington districts generally clustered near the national average, with little evidence that any demographic group was systematically under-identified. The audit also found that special education funding has historically been insufficient, with districts collectively covering about $500 million in costs not paid by state or federal sources, and that districts spent about 26% more per student than they received in funding. Auditors noted recent legislative changes that removed the special education enrollment cap and changed the safety net process, but said it was too soon to assess their effects. Their recommendations to OSPI included clarifying what counts as an official special education referral, requiring districts to report referral data even when no evaluation follows, and ensuring the new statewide data system is developed with district input, training, and possibly a mandate for uniform use. OSPI staff said they concurred with the report and appreciated the work of the auditor’s office and JLARC. During member questions, Representative Paulette raised concerns that the audit did not directly examine prevalence of specific disabilities, such as autism and dyslexia, in vulnerable populations or compare Washington’s identification practices to medical and peer-reviewed prevalence data. Auditors responded that medical prevalence is not known in a systematic way, that educational eligibility differs from medical diagnosis, and that the report’s conclusions should not be read as proving no populations are under- or over-identified. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Step four is evaluation and negotiation.
• Evaluation and negotiation, step four, which would be the evaluation and negotiation.
• And those evaluators have to have a comprehensive understanding of what they are evaluating.
• And those evaluators have to have a comprehensive understanding of what they are evaluating.
• honestly, I'm not sure who these evaluators are.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a panel on Florida’s IT procurement process from the Florida Digital Service, the Department of Management Services, and the Department of Financial Services. Witnesses walked through the procurement lifecycle, including planning, market research, solicitation, evaluation, award, implementation, and closeout, and emphasized the role of budget timing, contract managers, and subject matter experts. DMS described the state’s enterprise contracting system, noting more than 1,100 active vendor agreements, over 800 involving IT services, and the statutory requirement to request 25 quotes for certain IT purchases. DFS demonstrated the Florida Accountability Contract Tracking System (FACS), explaining how agencies upload contract and payment data and how the public can search contracts and related documents online. Members focused on accountability, transparency, and whether the state is getting the best products and vendors. Questions addressed how contracts are vetted, how technical evaluations are performed, how financial consequences are used for missed deliverables, how public records and confidential information are handled, and how the state screens vendors for foreign-concern or bad-actor issues. Witnesses said agencies rely on technical experts for evaluations, that contract terms should include measurable deliverables and meaningful financial consequences, and that agencies—not procurement staff—generally manage performance, though Florida Digital Service oversees large IT projects of $10 million or more. The committee then shifted to broader policy discussion, including Senate Bill 7026 and proposals to reorganize state IT governance. Several members argued for stronger centralization under a state CIO or similar enterprise authority, while others cautioned against abrupt restructuring and stressed the need for a transition plan. Members also raised concerns about workforce retention, consulting services, recurring project overruns, and the need for better planning and periodic monitoring. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair thanking members and staff and adjourning the subcommittee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, requests one evaluation specialist, and three in the first year, and three additional evaluation
• <00:20:57.400> unit evaluation unit evaluation unit right<00:20:59.559> now<00:20:59.720
• Did you evaluate programs? So is this person going to evaluate, or say—say you have this person.
• so that there is an ongoing evaluation so that there is an ongoing evaluation of<00:26:35.200>
• The self-evaluation, you know, who's going to evaluate yourself?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A formal evaluation is being conducted by Mathematica, as Dr.
• How does that evaluation process happen?
• So there will be a formal evaluation, and the interim evaluation report is just what came out.
• So there will be a formal evaluation, and the interim evaluation report is just what came out.
• So as evaluations are... Sure.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the Evaluation of Services. the Evaluation of Services. recognize<00:59:54.319> Representative
• <01:00:07.920> of Alabama Commission on Evaluation of Alabama Commission on Evaluation of
• evaluated. Is this correct? evaluated. Is this correct?
• evaluating for what?
• evaluate evaluate >> and<01:10:18.880> they're<01:10:19.199> evaluating<01:10:20.400

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• program evaluation on SNAP administration and performance.
• And then lastly, we'll evaluate program integrity.
• So during the evaluation process, we'll be digging into this.
• Is that going to be part of the evaluation that we do? Mr.
• I'm a new program evaluator for the LFC.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:28:02.799> Right the site evaluation committee. Right the site evaluation committee.
• establishing a site evaluation establishing a site evaluation committee.<01:11:48.320> I<
• Um this is evaluation committee.
• evaluation committee.
• hub of the site evaluation committee. hub of the site evaluation committee.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Evaluations, these certified evaluations, is a completely different topic.
• <00:02:11.520> the often in terms of evaluating the often in terms of evaluating the teacher
• <00:03:22.239> these<00:03:22.480> certified<00:03:23.080> evaluations evaluations
• these certified evaluations evaluations these certified evaluations is<00:03:23.920> a<00:03:
• They'd be put on an improvement plan so that, you know, they are evaluated more.

Keywords: This Live stream had a technical issue part way through and will be loaded fully later today., 958, all

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 48, which would reduce the state-required formal observation cycle for tenured teachers from once every three years to once every five years, while preserving local district authority to conduct more frequent observations if they choose. Supporters argued the change would cut paperwork and time burdens on experienced teachers and principals, while still allowing districts to monitor performance and place teachers on improvement plans when needed. Members also discussed the bill’s separate provisions on school improvement plans, with clarification that CSI/TSI low-performing schools would still be required to maintain comprehensive improvement plans and receive additional support from KDE, and that the bill was not changing the evaluation system for those schools. A second major topic was professional development and teacher induction/mentoring requirements. The bill would consolidate state-mandated PD requirements into a rotational schedule for tenured teachers, and members noted that teachers are already subject to federal and local PD obligations that the legislature cannot change. Several speakers emphasized that the bill was intended to reduce state-level mandates, not eliminate useful supports for new teachers, and one member raised concern that mandatory induction/mentoring could limit districts’ ability to use Title II funds; the response was that the program remains valuable and should be revisited with dedicated funding rather than discarded. There was also a brief question about suicide prevention hotline and Safe Haven Baby Box posting language, which was explained as existing statute consolidated into one place. The committee then voted on the bill and it passed, with members offering brief explanations of support and noting frustration with recurring annual training requirements such as bloodborne pathogens. After the vote, members thanked the bill sponsors and educators who helped shape the legislation, and the chair announced weekly office hours in Room 367. The meeting ended with congratulations to the new K-12 chair and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, we are always looking at our programs to evaluate time to completion of degrees and rates of
• still underway with the bill authors, the governor's office, and D.I.R. with my team about still evaluating
• about the difficult task that you have on behalf of the state of Texas to apply your wisdom and judgment

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > six Of these eight evaluations, six Of these eight evaluations, six evaluations<00:09:38.560
• evaluations were completed. evaluations were completed.
• I think there's evaluation.
• those closeout evaluations are current. those closeout evaluations are current.
• So, at that point, a closeout<01:05:12.400> evaluation closeout evaluation closeout evaluation

Bills: HF3564

Keywords: Greater Minnesota, regional parks, trails, grants, local government, 1183, house

Summary: The Legacy Finance Committee met to approve the prior meeting minutes and then heard a presentation from the Office of the Legislative Auditor on its performance audit of the Department of Natural Resources’ administration of Outdoor Heritage Fund grants. OLA explained that the DNR generally complied with the criteria tested, but the audit identified two main problem areas: grant payments and grant monitoring. The audit covered 13 grants, mostly legislatively named grants awarded in fiscal year 2020, and reviewed agreements, amendments, payments, monitoring, and some site visits. OLA reported that for three grantees, totaling about $400,000, invoices lacked enough detail to determine whether costs were allowable, and about $5,000 was paid to two grantees without sufficient supporting documentation. The auditors also said DNR lacked policies defining allowable costs and what “directly related to and necessary” means under state law. On monitoring, DNR missed required annual visits for six grants, made payments on current progress reports that were missing or not on file, and had weaknesses in closeout evaluations, including missing required elements, late completion, and two grants with no closeout evaluation at all. OLA recommended stronger documentation, clearer guidelines with the Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, timely monitoring and closeout, obtaining progress reports before payment, and improved internal controls. Members reacted strongly to the findings, especially the repeated failures to follow grant procedures and the risks of legislatively named grants and advance payments. Representative Heintzeman and Vice Chair Skraba questioned whether the issues reflected broader problems in state grant oversight and asked about prepayments, follow-up, and whether more legislative action was needed. OLA officials said they do not rely on self-attestation, but instead retest agencies after 2 to 3 years, and noted a new annual update-report process that will track whether agencies implement prior recommendations. Judy Randall, the Legislative Auditor, said the laws and policies already exist and emphasized that the issue is ensuring agency staff follow them; she also said most recommendations in the recent update report had been implemented. No further committee action or vote was taken on the audit during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that was on oral evaluation and prophylaxis and cleaning.
• One is oral evaluation for children.
• This is what CMS says, so this is what we're being evaluated against.
• Our oral evaluation rate is around 50%.
• So they have a 4% oral evaluation rate compared to the 17.5%.

Keywords: 962, all

Summary: The MAPOC Women and Children’s Health Subcommittee heard a presentation from Kate Parker Riley, executive director of the Connecticut Dental Health Partnership, on the Husky Dental Program and efforts to improve oral health during pregnancy. She reviewed the structure of Connecticut’s Medicaid dental benefit, the ASO model, provider network, utilization trends, and member barriers to care. She noted that children’s dental measures remain above the national median, but adult utilization is lower and the dental provider network has been shrinking, with longer wait times in rural areas. A major focus was the state’s goal to raise the rate of oral evaluation during pregnancy from about 17.5% to 25% by 2030. Riley described planned outreach to OB/GYN practices using a draft “snapshot” report showing each practice’s pregnancy oral-health rate compared with the state average, along with education materials based on ACOG and AAP guidance. Committee members and guests discussed barriers such as lack of provider training, workflow burden, access to dentists who will see pregnant patients, and the need for stronger referral bridges. Suggestions included adding simple oral-health screening questions in OB settings, using human support to make appointments, and exploring co-located dental hygienists or other embedded models. Riley also highlighted partnerships with DSS, DCF, Head Start, WIC, Read to Grow, YMCA programs, refugee resettlement agencies, and school-based and hospital partners, as well as data-sharing and navigation efforts. She said pregnant members newly identified through HUSKY will now receive outreach and navigation support. DSS dental director Carolyn MacArthur introduced herself and said she supports the initiative, noting the literature linking untreated maternal dental disease to poor child oral-health outcomes. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with thanks and a preview of upcoming July presentations on integrated behavioral health and home visitation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• The administration is evaluating this.
• A formal evaluation is being conducted by Mathematica, as Dr.
• So there will be a formal evaluation, and the interim evaluation report is just what came out, evaluating
• As has been referenced here, an interim evaluation has been put forth.
• With individual evaluation partners for additional, more focused evaluations on the work that's happening

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the site evaluation committee to seek<00:24:34.559> additional<00:24:35.039> fees<00:24
• being available to the site evaluation being available to the site evaluation committee.<00:25:04.559
• <00:25:38.960> committee, solid waste site evaluation committee, solid waste site evaluation
• a major role on this site evaluation a major role on this site evaluation committee.<00:25:49.200
• > committee<00:25:52.240> processes the site evaluation committee processes the site evaluation

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we have one performance audit by the state auditor, which is evaluating how charter schools identify
• The state auditor's office is evaluating how charter schools identify and support at-risk students.
• In general, the results of our audit reflected positively on the schools that we evaluated.
• We didn't end up evaluating that as part of this audit.
• That we looked at, we didn't end up evaluating that as part of this audit. I appreciate that.

Summary: The committee meeting began with a brief explanation of the renamed Joint Legislative Audit Review Committee subcommittee, now called the Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits, and a presentation from the State Auditor’s Office on its current biennium performance audit work plan. The auditor described how topics are selected from a large pool of potential audits and highlighted several ongoing or planned audits, including the Liquor and Cannabis Board, oversight of authorized entities serving students with disabilities, the Quality Home Care Initiative, Medicaid managed care versus fee-for-service costs, the Housing Commission tenant ownership follow-up, DSHS vendor payment patterns, implementation of the Since Time Memorial curriculum, and the Washington State ferry system. Members asked about coordination with JLARC to avoid duplication, and the auditor said the offices exchange work plans, monthly updates, and quarterly coordination meetings. The committee then heard the State Auditor’s performance audit on how charter schools identify and support at-risk students. Auditors reviewed four charter schools—Catalyst Public Schools, Innovation High School, Pinnacles Prep, and Rainier Prep—and focused on English language learners, homeless students, and special education students. The audit found the schools met nearly all legal requirements reviewed, with only one area where two schools partially met a language-access requirement. The schools also used several promising practices, including small-group instruction, culturally responsive environments, and multi-tiered systems of support, though the auditors recommended better documentation of procedures to improve consistency. Families interviewed generally reported positive experiences, while noting resource constraints. Committee members asked about how the four schools were selected, whether the audit compared charter populations to home districts, and how MTSS requirements applied to the schools reviewed. The State Auditor’s Office said the sample was chosen for geographic diversity, student population characteristics, and representation from both authorizers, and that K-2 MTSS requirements were not evaluated because they applied to only one school. Representatives from the Charter School Commission and charter school advocates responded positively, emphasizing technical assistance, collaboration, and sharing best practices across schools. Two public testifiers also supported the report and said it highlighted effective practices that could be expanded across charter and traditional public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• authorizer performance evaluation authorizer performance evaluation system.<00:02:09.360> Um<
• :35.760> of<00:03:35.920> the oversight, and evaluation of the oversight, and evaluation
• evaluation system. evaluation system. uh<00:10:03.120> statute<00:10:03.600> also<
• Um that is a prerequisite evaluation.
• <00:19:18.240> authorizer uh achievement and evaluating authorizer uh achievement and evaluating

Bills: HF3487, HF3421

Keywords: anonymous reporting, school safety, education, crisis intervention, threat reporting, early literacy, reading instruction, teacher preparation, teacher candidates, teacher licensure, educator licensing, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, field experience, supervised practicum, evidence-based reading, science of reading, literacy methods, teacher training, preservice teachers