Transcript Highlights:

• We should always consider what the alternative is when we are evaluating legislation.
• We should always consider what the alternative is when we are evaluating legislation.
• This promotes consistency and accountability in evaluating charter school performance.
• So this is a study that asks five counties to help us evaluate their systems with a new way of looking
• So this is a study that asks five counties to help us evaluate their systems with a new way of looking

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee heard and advanced three bills. CS/HB 1267, by Rep. Boussada, would require school districts to allow Schools of Hope to use vacant or surplus facilities or co-locate in schools with capacity, with non-instructional services handled through a pro rata agreement and a performance-based agreement requiring Schools of Hope to meet expectations within five years. Supporters argued it would better use underfilled public schools and help students in the bottom 10% of schools statewide; opponents raised concerns about local control, funding, and the effect on public schools. The bill passed 13-2. The committee also heard CS/HB 1115, by Rep. Valdes, which would require sharing certain discretionary sales surtax revenues with eligible charter schools based on enrollment, create a standardized charter school monitoring tool, and align Schools of Hope sponsoring-entity rules with charter school processes. Supporters said it would improve consistency and accountability; critics questioned fiscal impacts and district flexibility. That bill passed 13-2. The final bill, CS/HB 1213, by Rep. Alvarez, would create a K-12 School Route Optimization Pilot Program using five counties to test AI-assisted analysis of school bus routes and walking conditions, with the goal of improving child safety for students who currently walk long distances. Members discussed hazardous conditions, possible use of safe-school transportation funds, and the bill’s lack of fiscal impact. Public testimony included support from education and parent groups. The bill passed unanimously, 15-0. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And they are the 16 local... evaluate how well they're working now evaluate how well they're working
• Uh, versus evaluating your process.
• Uh, versus evaluating your process.
• Uh, versus evaluating your process.
• Uh, versus evaluating your process.

Bills: HF4072, HF3691, HF4613

Keywords: workforce development, journalism, local news, internships, media training, emergency management, essential employees, public safety, law enforcement, workforce, economic development, appropriation, Twin Cities Marathon, Explore Minnesota, grants, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• How often are we evaluating that trend if it's going down?”
• My understanding is that we will be doing an ongoing evaluation of that, yes.
• My understanding is that we will be doing an ongoing evaluation of that, yes.
• And we completed an evaluation last year for that for every dollar invested.
• For the people, the community is asking urgently to evaluate your work.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and then took public testimony from the administration, LAO, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and an aging/disability advocacy group. The administration described IHSS as a large Medi-Cal long-term services program serving more than 900,000 recipients and proposed three changes: shifting some growth costs tied to authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the statewide backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The administration also discussed the earlier CFCO reassessment penalty change for counties and said overdue reassessments had dropped significantly. LAO said the governor’s overall IHSS cost estimates appeared reasonable, but raised concerns about the hours-per-case cost shift, including unclear root causes for growth, limited county control over statewide averages, and uncertainty about the eventual savings. County Welfare Directors Association, SEIU, and consumer/advocacy witnesses opposed the hours cost shift, arguing counties use state tools, the proposal would pressure counties to cut services, and it could harm older adults and people with disabilities by increasing institutionalization and shifting costs elsewhere. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the rationale for the proposal, the lack of a defined baseline, and whether the current assessment tools or MOE structure should instead be revisited. On the backup provider system, the administration said the program is underused and costly to administer relative to service spending, while LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced instead of eliminating it. County, labor, and consumer witnesses opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical emergency safety net even if utilization is low, especially for rural areas and people with complex needs. Members also asked about data quality, county backup systems, and whether consumers know the program exists. On the Medi-Cal/IHSS alignment proposal, the administration said automation would stop General Fund-only spending when recipients lose Medi-Cal and restore IHSS automatically when Medi-Cal is regained; LAO and others noted the proposal had been rejected before and urged better notices and safeguards. Witnesses warned that automatic termination could create gaps in care and unpaid work for providers, while the department said counties already manually terminate in some cases and that automation is ready if approved. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair indicated the committee would continue with public comment and later items before a hard adjournment time.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to program evaluation division.
• <00:03:01.120> of to talk about our evaluation of to talk about our evaluation of guardianship
• As part of our evaluation, we attended a number of guardianship hearings and spoke with people subject
• , we attended a As part of our evaluation, we attended a number<00:10:16.079> of<00:10:16.320>
• , pilot project during our evaluation, pilot project during our evaluation, relying<00:21:39.280>

Bills: HF3901, HF962, HF4428, HF4478, HF1775

Keywords: foster care, ombudsperson, investigative powers, children's rights, complaint process, HF4428, Medical Assistance, Medicaid, community engagement, work requirement, work mandate, employment requirement, community service, 80 hours, half-time student, income threshold, federal minimum wage, eligibility verification, benefit suspension, benefit termination

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think maybe just the last bullet that I hadn't mentioned, but if that set of evaluations would
• We then review the request and the report and do a closeout evaluation in terms of whether objectives
• Commissioner, if I may, if the grant closeout evaluation is not meeting standards, do you still make
• <01:05:34.480> report<01:05:35.520> because best kind of evaluation report because
• <01:13:29.159> if workforce one system to evaluate if workforce one system to evaluate if

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill empowers Oppaga to conduct a thorough evaluation and reporting on these data points.
• It requires an initial review and evaluation report by December 31st. 25 with recommendations for other
• relevant data in information to perform an effective annual evaluation of outcomes.
• An annual evaluation report by December one 2026. >> That is the bill got to drive golf that are there
• So I really would love to know, and we'll have more of that information to DCF who can really evaluated

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Now the bill as filed required a re-evaluation evaluation of the four CP by the commission.
• assess costs for for the The committee substitute is much more prescriptive requirements of that evaluation
• It mandates a rulemaking. to implement the findings of the evaluation.
• The evaluation requires that the commission consider seasonal peak demands.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• assess digital media literacy programs to combat online radicalization, identify best practices, evaluate
• assess digital media literacy programs to combat online radicalization, identify best practices, evaluate
• assess digital media literacy programs to combat online radicalization, identify best practices, evaluate
• educational efficacy, identify best practices from efforts to combat anti-Semitism in other states, evaluate
• educational efficacy, identify best practices from efforts to combat anti-Semitism in other states, evaluate

Bills: S0330, S0526, S0862, S1072, S1078, S1192, S1250, S1296, S1298, S1642, S1698, S7022

Keywords: firefighter disability, law enforcement disability, correctional officer disability, correctional probation officer, presumptive disability, workers' compensation, line of duty presumption, heart disease presumption, hypertension presumption, tuberculosis presumption, public safety employees, first responders, physical examination, preemployment exam, medical specialist, Medicare reimbursement, employing agency, Florida Statutes 112.18, Florida Statutes 943.13, occupational disease

Summary: The committee heard several bills and confirmations, with most measures reported favorably. Senate Bill 330 clarified the heart disease presumption for firefighters, law enforcement, and correctional officers, codifying the medical definition of heart disease and allowing transferring law enforcement officers to rely on a prior physical if a new agency does not provide one. Support was waived in by the Florida Smart Justice Alliance and the Fraternal Order of Police, and the bill passed unanimously. Senate Bill 526, as amended by a delete-all amendment, addressed commercial construction contracts, permit standards, fee reductions when private providers are used, floodproofing, product approval categories, and adoption of certain electrical code standards; it drew support from several construction and business groups and one opposing appearance, then was reported favorably. Senate Bill 1192 created a pilot program for callback queues at the Department of Commerce and Department of Children and Families to reduce hold times for callers seeking re-employment assistance and public benefits, and it also passed favorably. Senate Bill 1078 established transition procedures for a governor-elect, including agency liaisons, briefing materials, office space, and access to records; an amendment shifted IT support to the Department of Management Services, narrowed access to confidential records, and increased penalties for unauthorized disclosure, after which the bill was approved. Senate Bill 7022 extended a public records exemption for classroom examinations and assessment instruments through 2031 and expanded coverage to school district boards and public schools; it was also reported favorably. Senate Bill 862, as amended, set a $60,000 salary goal by 2030 for state correctional officers, probation officers, and institutional security specialists, with annual raises subject to appropriations; members and witnesses emphasized recruitment, retention, and safety, and the bill passed. Senate Bill 1250 removed the requirement that the Commission on Human Relations use registered mail for certain notices under the Florida Civil Rights Act, allowing less expensive notice methods, and it was reported favorably. Senate Bill 1698 allowed certain employers to post required workplace notices electronically instead of physically, and it passed without opposition. The committee also recommended confirmation of 10 appointees to the Florida Commission on Human Relations and the State Retirement Commission. The most extensive debate centered on Senate Bill 1072, which created an anti-Semitism task force within the Department of Legal Affairs to review anti-Semitism in Florida, improve community relations, advise on law enforcement training, assess digital media literacy efforts, evaluate hate crime statutes, and recommend policy changes. The sponsor said the bill was intended to address a growing problem and noted that Florida already uses the Holocaust Remembrance definition of anti-Semitism in statute. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, arguing it could chill protected speech, especially criticism of Israel, and could be used selectively against students, activists, Muslims, Arabs, and Jewish anti-Zionists; several also said existing hate-crime and civil-rights laws were sufficient and that the task force should include protections against Islamophobia and anti-Arab hate. One member raised concerns about the constitutionality of creating such task forces in light of prior actions by the Attorney General. Despite the opposition, the bill was reported favorably on a party-line style vote with Senator Bracey Davis voting yes along with the majority. Senate Bill 1642, the Freedom in the Workplace Act, was also heard and drew significant questioning. The bill would bar public employers and contractors from requiring pronoun use, certain gender-identity-related training, or non-binary sex options on forms, and would protect employees and contractors from adverse action based on religious, moral, conscience-based, or biology-based beliefs. Senator Polsky questioned whether the bill could interfere with anti-harassment training and workplace discipline, while the sponsor said the measure was meant to prevent government coercion and extend protections similar to those in school settings. The transcript cuts off before the final disposition of this bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• -36-08 was enacted in 1985 and requires a group health insurer to cover services for diagnosis, evaluation
• Section 26.1-39 was enacted in 1985 and requires a group health insurer to cover diagnosis, evaluation
• These services span prevention, evaluation, and treatment.
• The other two graphs compare our rates for an oral evaluation in our region and in the nation.
• Yes. 30.8% of Medicaid members received an oral evaluation. No. No. Okay. Thank you.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review the history and current treatment of North Dakota health insurance mandates, with presentations from Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota, Sanford Health Plan, the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), and the Insurance Department. The discussion focused on how mandates apply differently to fully insured, self-funded, ACA, Medicaid, and PERS plans; how the state’s benchmark plan and federal essential health benefits affect coverage; and how the existing process requires cost-benefit analysis and, for certain measures, a PERS pilot period before broader application. Presenters also reviewed the long list of existing state mandates, including provider, beneficiary, and coverage requirements, and noted that many were enacted decades ago and have not been revisited despite changes in medical evidence and treatment options. Witnesses from the carriers argued that mandates should be reviewed periodically because some are outdated, can create unintended costs, and may not align with current medical guidance. Examples cited included PSA screening, off-label drug coverage, prior authorization rules, step therapy, and cost-sharing provisions for mental health and substance use treatment. They emphasized that carriers often cover services without a mandate when supported by clinical evidence, and that mandates can shift costs to employers and employees, especially in the fully insured small-group market. They also suggested possible policy improvements such as clearer mandate definitions, better transparency around cost-benefit analyses, a regular 10-year review of mandates, and more timely submission of proposals through the interim process. PERS and the Insurance Department highlighted a recurring tension over what counts as a mandate and when a measure triggers the state’s defrayal obligation under federal law. PERS described its interim committee process, the April 1 deadline for fiscal-impact proposals, and the limited pilot program used for certain measures, noting that only a few bills have gone through the full pilot process. The Insurance Department explained that it views new benefit mandates through the lens of the ACA benchmark plan and essential health benefits, distinguishing true new benefits, such as infertility coverage, from changes to existing benefits, such as telehealth or insulin cost-sharing caps. No votes were taken on policy changes; the meeting was informational, with members asking questions about costs, applicability, transparency, and whether a periodic mandate review should be established.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're going to have the PUC look at any proposal and evaluate it for the cost-benefit relationship,
• So, I I that were evaluated.
• aren't, um, going to be evaluating those. those. those.
• /c><02:23:53.760> um<02:23:53.920> whether evaluate a proposed landfill, um whether evaluate
• whether that's a macro scale evaluation whether that's a macro scale evaluation of<02:26:49.560>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You have to go through a process of ensuring your teacher evaluation and appraisal system is fair, and
• If they cut muster with our evaluation.
• At the top, if you are an A or B approved If you're an A or B evaluated operator under our A through
• Evaluated. Evaluated. Thank you. I'm not a teacher. I'm a nurse. Evaluated. And that's costs.
• unrelated to the existence of an ESA, anyone who goes. to private school is entitled to get an evaluation

Keywords: committee meeting, legislation, public testimony, discussion, procedural

Summary: The meeting covered various topics, but specific discussions and bills were not detailed in the available transcript. Despite the lack of documented debates or acknowledgments, it was noted that committee members were present, and there may have been attempts to address crucial legislative matters. The dynamics of the meeting suggested a standard procedural gathering where routine insights were likely shared among the attendees.

Transcript Highlights:

• They can continue to evaluate their students on knowledge.
• private schools get away with taking it because it is a national standard, and we can really truly evaluate
• They can continue to evaluate their students on, on, on knowledge.
• Shouldn't we reevaluate whether that is the appropriate. evaluation of our 3rd grade students.
• Well, I'm just trying to evaluate.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• And number 3, how does the Department for Poor responsible Organization evaluate the success of the program
• medical physiological, psychological educational testing and other services that are designed to evaluate
• The fiddler's multidisciplinary centers provide specialized assessments and evaluations, academic and
• So every stage of the process from an initial screening to evaluation to ultimately working within the
• They have been very pleased with the sensitivity and the specificity of the telehealth evaluations.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They are evaluated by the superintendent. So there's that built-in accountability as well.
• Have we gone through some evaluative process?
• Have we gone through some evaluative process?
• Have we gone through some evaluative process?
• Have we gone through some evaluative Have we gone through some evaluative process?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Education Committee first recognized several guest groups, including a Harrison County leadership group and students from Mercy Academy, then heard a presentation tied to Career and Technical Education Month from Kentucky FCCLA student leaders D. Owens and Kaden Dunn. The students described FCCLA’s role in building confidence, leadership, and career readiness, and argued that CTE is a strong pathway rather than an alternative one. They cited membership and achievement statistics, discussed their own experiences in FCCLA, and urged continued and expanded state support for CTE, internships, apprenticeships, rural access, and teacher recruitment. Several senators responded positively, praising the presentation and emphasizing the value of CTE and workforce preparation. The committee then took up Senate Bill 152, an act relating to education, and adopted both a committee substitute and a committee amendment. Senator Aaron Reed explained that the bill would replace school-based decision-making councils with school-based advisory councils, while keeping parent and teacher input but shifting final authority over hiring, curriculum, and school leadership to principals and superintendents. He said the bill was intended to clarify responsibility and strengthen accountability. Senator Thomas questioned whether there was evidence that site-based councils were failing, and Reed said he had heard concerns from parents and teachers but did not have a formal list of evidence at hand. Senator Higdon supported the bill as a needed review of a system adopted in 1990, noting that education has changed significantly and that prior reforms have shown the process can work. Senators West and others asked for clarification that parental involvement would remain, and Reed said it would. Three opponents then testified: Elizabeth Irwin of the Kentucky Association of School Councils, Ed Hendrick representing KA, and Autumn Nagel of the Kentucky State PTA. They argued that dismantling SBDMs would reduce authentic parent and teacher voice, politicize school decisions, and take authority away from those closest to students. They said local councils have transparency and elections already in place and urged support for the existing school council structure rather than reducing its role.

Transcript Highlights:

• In that finding, performance-based salary increases were paid without performance evaluations.
• And so really the way we evaluate this, yes, is it... We are not.
• And so really, the way we evaluate this, yes, is it capacity? And then we evaluate skill set.
• How do we evaluate income levels? Right now some of these programs, it's stated income.
• And so then we were not able to effectively evaluate that project.

Summary: The committee met to receive a series of audit presentations, beginning with the statewide Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for fiscal year 2025. The State Auditor’s Office and OMB reported a clean, unmodified opinion for the state, with strong financial results including a $40.6 billion net position, $30.99 billion in assets, $1.81 billion in liabilities, and continued Legacy Fund growth. OMB also explained the new GASB 101 compensated-absences reporting change and discussed pension-liability fluctuations tied to discount-rate assumptions and investment performance. Members asked about how the state compares to others and about the effect of short-term commodity price swings, and OMB said the report reflects actual fiscal-year results rather than forecasts. The committee then heard the University System audit, which also received a clean opinion but included four findings: misreporting of Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund revenue, insufficient monitoring of service organizations at CTS, NDSU, and UND, improper bank reconciliations at Dakota College of Bottineau, Dickinson State, and Williston State, and investment/cash reconciliation problems at Bismarck State College related to bond proceeds. University officials agreed with the findings and said corrective actions were underway, including internal review of bank reconciliations. Members raised questions about NDSU’s use of certificates of deposit, and university staff explained that CDs are used to earn interest on funds being accumulated for future projects. Several other audits were presented, most with clean opinions and no findings, including the State Auditor’s Office, Workforce Safety and Insurance, Housing Finance Agency, Housing Incentive Fund, Job Service North Dakota, the Retirement and Investment Office, PERS, the Center for Distance Education, the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents, the Ethics Commission, and the Office of Administrative Hearings. Notable exceptions included a State Fair Association audit with an adverse opinion on the foundation component unit because its financial statements were not available for audit, and a Securities Department performance audit finding that performance-based pay increases and bonuses were issued without required evaluations. The committee also discussed the State Auditor’s future needs, including more staff capacity, data analytics, cybersecurity reviews, possible subpoena authority, independent legal counsel, and whether some audits—such as the Ethics Commission and State Fair—should be handled by independent third parties or under different statutory arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• ... ...agency-speak on you, but there are flood management evaluations.
• So TCEQ does, again, what we call an individual or site-specific evaluation.
• We have the ability to constantly evaluate how can we use less water.
• If not, we have to do an edge case evaluation. Is that the concept?
• Decisions on this scale deserve careful evaluation and public input before development.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the task force evaluated the current law compared to current investment management best practices
• Uh, the task force evaluated the current law compared to current investment management best practices
• Uh, the task force evaluated the current law compared to current investment management best practices
• Uh, the task force evaluated the current law compared to current investment management best practices
• <02:00:12.080> and do have a chance to kind of evaluate and do have a chance to kind of evaluate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• everyone involved in the bioeconomy value chain for collective decision-making and action to educate, evaluate
• decision-making and action<00:02:58.520> to<00:02:58.640> educate,<00:02:59.200> evaluate
• action to educate, evaluate action to educate, evaluate environmental<00:03:00.440> impacts
• :08:13.280> of<00:08:13.400> disadvantage<00:08:14.000> to<00:08:14.080> evaluate
• <00:08:14.640> the bit of disadvantage to evaluate the bit of disadvantage to evaluate the

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill streamlines standards for licensing and experience of evaluators at residential treatment centers
• Evaluators must be a psychiatrist or a psychologist licensed in Florida with at least three years of
• a residential treatment center, and maintains the current experience requirements for qualified evaluators
• a residential treatment center, and maintains the current experience requirements for qualified evaluators
• I know the court would evaluate that.

Bills: S0560, S0590, S0778, S1010

Keywords: child welfare, psychotropic medication, Department of Children and Families, community-based care, liability insurance, forensic services, defendants, mental health, judicial system, defense, legal definitions, minors, healthcare, parental rights, criminal penalties, civil action, sex-reassignment, investigations, economic damages

Summary: The Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs considered four bills. SB 590, by Sen. Bradley, would toll the statute of limitations for failure to report suspected child abuse by mandatory reporters until the offense is known to law enforcement; an amendment clarified retroactive application for offenses not already time-barred by the bill’s effective date. Sen. Bradley said the bill is intended to ensure accountability in institutional abuse cases and not to change the reasonable-suspicion reporting standard. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. The committee also heard SB 778, by Sen. Simon, which would update the definition of forensic client so certain individuals with intellectual disabilities or autism whose charges were dismissed for incompetency can be housed with other Chapter 916 residents, reducing duplicative staffing and space needs at the Agency for Persons with Disabilities. Barney Bishop appeared in support, and the bill was reported favorably without amendment. SB 560, by Sen. Garcia, would streamline procedures for psychotropic medication prescriptions for children in DCF custody, reduce duplicative background checks and reporting, and simplify consent documentation. Amendments removed language allowing licensed clinical social workers and marriage and family therapists to serve as evaluators and narrowed changes to the Road to Independence Program’s postsecondary education services and supports, extending eligibility ages from 18 to 26 while keeping the five-year cap. Senators discussed the fiscal impact and funding blend for the education stipend. The committee adopted the amendments and reported the bill favorably. The committee then took up SB 1010, by Sen. Yarbrough, which adds criminal and civil enforcement for violations involving sex-reassignment prescriptions or procedures for minors and related parental-rights provisions. An amendment clarified that the civil action authority applies to minors and that damages benefit the affected minor. Public testimony was heavily divided, with supporters saying the bill enforces existing protections and opponents warning it would chill care, counseling, and school-based support for transgender youth. Senators Harrell, Sharief, and Rouson raised concerns about vagueness, standing, and impacts on teachers and health professionals; Sharief voted no, while the bill was still reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, it's perception until we're able to evaluate more critically with data and with transparency
• We will work with them to evaluate what is working and what isn't, provide any advice we can, and connect
• a particular approach to delivering education in general, and you're constantly evaluating.
• policymaker—having been in this position and having worked in education for all these years—my evaluation
• And come up with their own evaluation strategy for how they're going to define success.