Transcript Highlights:

• If you have an IEP, to have an IEP means you've engaged with your district public school and you've gone
• that IEP continues or not.
• The first pathway is the IEP or the evaluation by a public school district.
• It's not like an IEP then. No, it's not. Are there any further questions?
• Student has a qualifying condition and normally a parent would have to sign an IEP.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Freedom Account Oversight Committee met on March 27 and approved the agenda, adding a request for clarification on how the Children’s Scholarship Fund separates applications for the EFA program and the education tax credit program. The committee also approved minutes from December 30, 2025, and March 27, 2026, with a request that the March minutes include a link to the live stream. Members discussed the status of pending Legislative Budget Assistant audit reports on EFA and special education, noting the reports were still not released and would likely come later in the summer after review by the Department of Education and the Children’s Scholarship Fund. A major topic was the EFA program’s administrative fee, which statute allows up to 10% of deposits. Children’s Scholarship Fund representatives said current administrative costs were under 8%, that staffing had been reduced through the ScholarVia platform, and that any unused amount is reconciled and returned to students at year’s end. Members asked for historical administrative-cost data and a written explanation of how the withholding and reconciliation process works. The committee also reviewed the distinction between the EFA and education tax credit funding streams and was told the two programs use separate applications and separate funds, though both use the same platform. The committee spent substantial time on assessment and accountability. Department of Education staff explained that EFA students may satisfy annual assessment requirements through a portfolio, a norm-referenced test, or the statewide assessment; only about 10 EFA students took the statewide assessment, while most used portfolios or standardized tests such as the California Achievement Test and NWEA. Staff described how statewide assessment data are kept separate by student identifier and can be aggregated for EFA reporting, and members asked for breakdowns by grade, test type, and school district. The department also discussed linking assessments through Lexiles and Quantiles and said it could provide a list of commonly used formative assessments in New Hampshire districts. The committee additionally discussed a possible PSAT addition to the state contract and the costs of the statewide assessment program. Another major issue was special education eligibility and services within the EFA program. Members questioned the rule allowing a medical certification of disability from a licensed professional anywhere in the United States as an alternative to an IEP-based determination. Department staff said the current system allows either pathway, that about 1,000 EFA students are identified as special education students, and that the program does not track growth or service alignment on an individual basis. Members expressed concern that the medical-certification route may be too broad and asked for data on the disability categories used. The committee also discussed career and technical education access for EFA students, noting that Senate Bill 491 would provide guidance and that House Bill 1817 would address access and funding issues, but that current law still allows EFA funds to be used to pay CTE costs. The meeting ended with a request for future agenda items and a decision to leave the next meeting date open until fall, pending further information from the LBA audit process.

Transcript Highlights:

• . $4 million for a new state grant to reimburse school districts for the cost of providing IEPs for the
• So IEPs are still provided through the public school system when it relates to the scholarship IEPs.
• and to delineate various things in the IEP and the EEP and the 504, etc., in discussion with families
• Because we feel like it would effectively require private schools to write a full IEP for each student
• Parents may not even realize that they have an IEP or 504. Many of them are outdated.

Summary: The committee first heard the proposed Pre-K-12 education budget for fiscal year 2025-26, totaling $34.7 billion. The chair highlighted major increases for the FEFP, including $29.6 billion for public schools and K-12 scholarships, a $984 million year-over-year increase, along with higher per-FTE funding, $4 billion for the Family Empowerment Scholarship, $431.4 million for VPK, funding for school safety, the Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, school hardening, Jewish day school security, and an education enrollment stabilization fund. With no public comment, the committee adopted a motion for staff technical corrections and then approved the budget proposal as a recommendation to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee then considered SB 1402 on dropout retrieval programs. The bill expands eligibility so any individual who has withdrawn from high school may enroll in dropout retrieval services and clarifies how school grades are calculated for virtual instruction providers that offer those services. An amendment clarifying the grading calculation was adopted, and the committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up SPB 7030 on educational scholarship programs, a broad measure addressing school choice funding and administration. The bill would fund the Family Empowerment Scholarship as a separate categorical, expand the education stabilization fund, create fall and spring application windows, require a single scholarship application and more documentation, assign student IDs, standardize payment timing to monthly installments, require continued eligibility verification, and add Level 2 background checks for providers receiving state funds. Members raised questions about background-check enforcement, payment timing, data sharing, and the impact on homeschool and private-school families. Public testimony included support from school-choice advocates and concerns from private-school representatives about added regulatory burdens and deadlines. The committee adopted the bill as a committee bill and reported it favorably, with Senator Osgood voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 508 on the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program, which requires private schools to disclose in writing what accommodations, modifications, and services they will provide to students with existing plans such as IEPs, EEPs, 504 plans, or ELL plans before enrollment. An amendment was adopted to require public schools to consult with private schools about equitable services. Testimony was mixed: supporters said the bill would give parents needed information for informed choice, while private-school representatives said the language could be burdensome and vague. The committee reported the bill favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• individual education plan IEP. individual education plan IEP.
• to a student's IEP to a student's IEP to<00:51:20.000> add<00:51:20.160> requirements<
• in IEP meetings, they're full of jargon. in IEP meetings, they're full of jargon.
• longer have an IEP.
• longer have an IEP.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My wife and I lobbied that the school district should include the transition planning form in the IEP
• 7 to ensure that the school district is doing, in fact, what they are supposed to be doing under an IEP
• Still, meetings were delayed, emails ignored, and verbal agreements left out of IEPs.
• My son, like I said, still doesn't have an IEP.
• The district proposes the IEP. The district holds the records. The district proposes the IEP.

Keywords: 995, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• This is determined through the individual educational plan or IEP team process.
• I don't know if it's on was in should have been given an IEP.
• But the parent wants to keep that in the chiles IEP. How do we try to mitigate that?
• Now from us Hitler standpoint, we do have classes, too, teach people how to develop IEP.
• But I also I think I know from experience that an IEP meeting in one place is not the same as an IEP

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For many families, navigating the IEP process is complicated.
• IEP non-implementation continues to be a problem in our state.
• IEP non-implementation continues to be a problem in our state.
• It requires timely initial evaluations for IEP eligibility.
• IEPs represent real children, families, and futures.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and began by welcoming students and coaches participating in the inaugural Sunshine State Debate. Members then heard and voted on a series of education-related bills, with most measures receiving favorable reports by unanimous or near-unanimous votes. The first bill, HB 1081, created a Cybersecurity Internship Clearance Readiness Program in the Department of Commerce for NCACE-designated universities and Florida College System institutions; a friendly amendment expanded access to private schools, and the bill passed 19-0. HB 1201 updated Florida’s epilepsy/seizure plan law to clarify protections for charter school students, require acceptance of physician-submitted plans, extend training validity to five years, and expand training to regular bus drivers; epilepsy advocates supported it, and it passed 19-0. HB 851 required annual autism-specific professional learning opportunities for teachers and school-based administrators, and it also passed 19-0. HB 615, dealing with IEPs, required quicker parent notice when services are missed, faster access to service logs, individualized parent orientation, and standardized district service logs; parents and advocates testified strongly in support, and the bill was reported favorably. HB 1503 added technology-related competencies to education courses and directed the Department of Education to develop computer science certification coverage; it passed 19-0. HB 371 required public schools to display portraits of Abraham Lincoln and George Washington in common areas and passed 19-0 after testimony both for and against. HB 731 revised extracurricular eligibility rules and allowed local policies for compensating coaches and activity sponsors; an amendment broadened manual requirements and clarified fee actions, and the bill passed 18-0. The committee also took up HB 173, a parental rights bill that drew the most extensive debate and public testimony. The bill would require parental consent for many medical decisions for minors, give parents access to medical records, and expand parental review/opt-in rights for certain school surveys and biofeedback devices. Supporters argued it restores parental authority, improves safety, and prevents children from being cut out of important medical decisions; opponents warned it would remove confidential access to STI treatment, crisis mental health care, and other services for minors in unsafe or abusive homes. Members raised questions about abuse exceptions, emergency care, and how the bill would affect routine treatment and time-sensitive care. The bill was not voted on in the portion provided, and debate continued through multiple rounds of sponsor responses and member comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• , as Josh mentioned, are not ...are not included, and so that students with IEPs, as Josh mentioned,
• Second, students with an IEP, or individual education program, must be handled differently.
• On the IEP issue, I understand that they kind of exist both on the website.
• IEP students, while they could be... IEP students are still required to get vaccinations.
• that students with IEPs don't get vaccinated, which...

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the special education program for each child in consultation with that child's parents and form the IEP
• the special education program for each child in consultation with that child's parents and form the IEP
• the special education program for each child in consultation with that child's parents and form the IEP
• the special education program for each child in consultation with that child's parents and form the IEP
• <00:29:33.600> and child's parents and form the IEP and child's parents and form the IEP and

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

Transcript Highlights:

• , the students' IEP.
• <01:16:45.679> the<01:16:45.840> students<01:16:46.800> IEP related to the IEP
• the students IEP related to the IEP the students IEP there<01:16:47.960> there<01:16:48.040><
• It may not be called an IEP in some plans, but it is usually called an IEP. Sometimes it’s a 504.
• So gender transitioning counseling is not part of what would make up an IEP.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division III held an informational hearing on Medicaid, Medicare, Choices for Independence, and related financing, while postponing nursing facility financing and the county cap discussion to a later date. DHHS officials Ann Landry, Jonathan Ballard, and Medicaid Director Henry Litman provided an overview of Medicaid’s role, noting it is a federal-state partnership with state-specific eligibility and benefits, and emphasizing that Medicaid is a major funding and programmatic support for other DHHS initiatives. They also distinguished Medicaid from Medicare and explained that Medicaid funding is not the same as grant funding, though some providers may also receive federal grants through other channels. The presentation focused on New Hampshire’s relatively small Medicaid program and why it differs from national averages. Officials said about 184,000 residents are covered, roughly one in seven Granite Staters compared with one in five nationally, and attributed the difference largely to the state’s higher per-capita income and older population. They highlighted that about 65% of Medicaid-enrolled adults in New Hampshire are working, that only 22% of births are covered by Medicaid versus 42% nationally, and that the state’s uninsured rate is lower than the national rate. Members asked about covered services, income limits, federal matching rates, and the names of optional eligibility groups; staff explained that New Hampshire offers the optional groups discussed, with matching rates varying by category, including 90% for Granite Advantage and certain other groups, and 65% for children above the required level. A substantial portion of the hearing covered eligibility rules and recent policy changes. Officials reviewed the history of Medicaid, including HCBS waivers, the CFI program, Katie Beckett, the Olmstead decision, the ACA, and the end of continuous enrollment after the public health emergency. They also discussed the 2023 legislative expansion of postpartum coverage from 60 days to 12 months and child eligibility changes. In response to questions, DHHS said it is tracking utilization and costs for the postpartum expansion and reported that many maternal deaths occur after the prior 60-day coverage period, often involving substance use disorder or suicide; they said the longer coverage is intended to improve access to treatment and prevention. The committee also walked through household-income examples, clarified that Medicaid eligibility is based on household income and categorical rules, and confirmed that Granite Advantage ends at 138% of the federal poverty level unless another categorical basis applies. No votes were taken, and the hearing remained informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• Part of Senate Bill 64 also included a statewide IEP.
• The focus is on strengthening student-centered standards aligned IEP development.
• The IEP template will support continuity of services when students transfer transparency for families
• First question, we've been working on the timeline for the online IEP year three, four, when does it
• Phase two, they'll be embedded into the IEP. Thank you. And then, Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Disruptions in any of these services can... ...which is an IEP, to succeed in school.
• from the previous school until another IEP... ...is outlined in their IEP from the previous school until
• another IEP is developed, adopted, and implemented.
• We're very much in support of continuing those IEPs for our students. We really are Boards.
• We're very much in support of continuing those IEPs for our students.

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Because now, as I read everything, the IEP plan is basically—it takes precedence over everything else
• , or we receive a treatment plan that is in direct... ...IEP, or we receive a treatment plan that is
• These shouldn't be an IEP dispute. I agree with that.
• I just... an IEP dispute. I've getting, I know you're getting those emails. I'm getting them.
• These shouldn't be an IEP. I agree with that dispute.

Bills: SR119, SCR65, HCR47, HB196, HB218, HB256, HB325, HB352, HB434, HB448, HB476, HB608, HB624, HB626, HB632, HB749, HB818, HB1059, HB1112, HB1242, HB1249

Keywords: SR119, Senate Resolution 119, D-D Breaux, Sara Breaux, LSU gymnastics, LSU Gymnastics Training Center, LSU Board of Supervisors, facility naming, honorary resolution, public buildings and grounds, women's athletics, Title IX, college gymnastics, SEC gymnastics, Louisiana State University, Tiger Athletic Foundation, women in sports, coach recognition, sports legend, campus naming

Summary: The Senate Education Committee met with four members present and took up a long agenda of education-related bills. Early items included SCR 65, which would create a K-12 student success task force to study statewide career and academic pathway advising; the committee adopted a substantive amendment adding designees and then reported the resolution favorably. The committee also reported favorably on SCR 119, honoring Coach D.D. Breaux, after brief remarks about her LSU gymnastics legacy and the request that LSU study naming its gymnastics training facility in her honor. Several bills affecting school operations and student support were heard and reported favorably, including HB 434 on probationary school bus driver employment and superintendent authority over dismissal; HB 484 expanding scholarship benefits for children and spouses of fallen or disabled firefighters and police officers; HB 749 and HB 1059 on savings accounts and TOPS math eligibility alignment; HB 218 adding food insecurity questions to student questionnaires, which was amended and reported favorably; HB 325 expanding TOPS Tech eligibility through dual enrollment and part-time use; HB 476 requiring Safe Haven law postings in middle and high school restrooms; HB 1249 clarifying access to school-based health centers, with an amendment adopted; HB 1242 allowing more than one early learning center license at the same location under certain circumstances; HB 632 improving data protections and functionality for LA First; and HB 352 on behavioral health services for public school students, which was amended to address IEP and dispute-process concerns before being reported favorably. Two bills drew extended debate over transparency, privacy, and school autonomy. HB 608 would create confidentiality for intercollegiate athletics revenue-sharing documents; LSU representatives argued the bill was needed to protect student-athletes and competitive information, while PAR and the Louisiana Press Association opposed it as an improper secrecy carve-out for state-generated revenue. Despite the opposition, the committee reported HB 608 favorably. HB 1112, which would exempt BESE-approved non-public pre-K programs from certain licensure and safety requirements and adjust related definitions, was amended and then heard with testimony from the Pelican Institute in support, arguing it corrects overreach from prior law and protects private school autonomy and parental choice.

Transcript Highlights:

• when there is a change um in their IEP when there is a change um in their IEP where<00:11:36.639
• So it's not limited to IEP. So is that okay?
• So it's not limited to IEP. So is that okay?
• So it's not limited to IEP. So is that okay?
• So it's not limited to IEP. So is that okay?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• these expenses qualify under the IEP these expenses qualify under the IEP um<00:26:16.240> for
• The IEPs have 13 special education. The IEPs have 13 different<01:11:07.320> categories.
• IEP.
• IEP. IEP.
• . specified and documented in an IEP.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee took up HB 1563, a special education aid formula bill, after a brief recess. Members reviewed a replace-all amendment that would keep the current reimbursement lag structure but make the bill effective July 1, 2028, with districts beginning to collect the new data in the next biennium. The amendment changes the reimbursement tiers from a dollar-based system to one tied to average per-pupil spending: districts would pay 100% below 2.5 times average per-pupil spending, 85% from 2.5 to 3.5 times, 20% from 3.5 to 10 times, and 10% above 10 times, with the state covering the remainder. Speakers emphasized that the bill is intended as an incremental step to gather better data before any larger expansion of state participation. A major new section would create a risk-based monitoring program for reimbursement claims. Instead of reviewing every claim individually, the department would review at least 20% of districts each year so every district is reviewed at least once every five years, with additional random or targeted reviews based on risk indicators, anomalies, prior findings, or other department criteria. Members discussed whether the audit sample should be district-based or student-based, and whether the bill should more specifically define the type of audit and the meaning of “other” criteria. Department witnesses said the current process already involves confidential information and that the new approach would not worsen privacy concerns; they also said the department would follow federal and state privacy laws and adopt rules to implement the process. Several members supported the bill as a practical first step to improve data collection and eventually expand aid, noting that districts currently do not track lower-cost special education students well. Others raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal note, possible local costs, and whether the new monitoring language gives the department too much discretion. The discussion ended with no vote taken in the excerpt, and members indicated they may need more time to review the final amendment before proceeding.

Transcript Highlights:

• You say you're doing 30 to 40 IEPs a month, but that's one 1,000th of all the IEPs that are out there
• So for most IEPs, you never see them, right? That's true, yeah. So what do you do with an IEP?
• mean that's one 1,000th of all the IEPs mean that's one 1,000th of all the IEPs that<01:23:40.639
• <01:23:50.920> you IEPs right so so for most of IEPs you IEPs right so so for most of IEPs
• 1% of the students who have IEP 1% of the students who have IEP Statewide<01:33:02.000> um

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with testimony from Charlotte Harding of the Conservation Land Stewardship Program, who explained that the office protects the state’s interests in conservation lands by monitoring conservation easements and related stewardship obligations. She described the program’s funding sources: a land conservation endowment held at the State Treasury and administered by the Council on Resources and Development, plus transfers from Fish and Game for easements not covered by the endowment. Members discussed how the endowment is funded when new easements are created, the program’s staffing, the loss of a state vehicle, and the need to increase in-state travel so staff can use personal vehicles for field monitoring. Harding said the office has two full-time positions and a seasonal employee, that the work is mostly monitoring rather than hands-on land management, and that enforcement issues are referred to the grantee agencies or, if needed, to the Council on Resources and Development. She also noted that the office works directly with landowners to resolve smaller issues and that stewardship has become a greater focus in the conservation community because ongoing oversight requires funding. Members asked about examples of properties under the program, including LCIP lands such as Musquash Headwaters, Hidden Valley Boy Scout Camp, and Nash Stream, and the committee did not take a motion before moving on. The committee then heard from Paul Breen and Susie Anzelone of the Pease Development Authority regarding the Division of Ports and Harbors operating budget. They explained that the authority provides finance, legal, environmental, and engineering support to the division, which operates New Hampshire’s only deep-water berth at Market Street, as well as facilities in Hampton, Rye, the Portsmouth Fish Pier, and navigational waters in the Piscataqua and Great Bay. They described the authority’s history after the closure of Pease Air Force Base, the transfer of roughly 2,400 acres, and the creation of a self-sustaining enterprise fund tied to airport and port operations. They emphasized that the division does not draw on the general fund because revenues from wharfage, dockage, parking, registration, and mooring fees cover operating costs, with any surplus retained for capital improvements and replacement. Members questioned several budget lines, including a sharp increase in overtime and workers’ compensation. Breen said overtime is driven largely by security needs at the deep-water port and fluctuates with vessel traffic, such as salt shipments, while workers’ comp is a DAS-set cost and not something the division controls. He said the budget is conservative and that if revenues fall short, capital projects would be the first items scaled back. The discussion also covered fee-setting, with Breen saying rates are reviewed against the local market and infrastructure constraints, and that some smaller facility fees had recently been increased after being stagnant for years.

Transcript Highlights:

• Survivor and a fierce advocate who was previously placed in an out-of-state facility through the IEP
• When I was 16, LA Unified School District used an IEP to send me to an out-of-state, non-public school
• They found that there's over 300 California students with IEPs that remain in out-of-state placements
• Zoe Schreiber, a survivor of an IEP partial IEP funded program, in strong support.
• partial IEP funded program in strong support out grant on behalf of the California Alliance of Child

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee met without a quorum for much of the hearing and heard several bills out of order. SB 249 by Senator Umberg would move county board of education elections from the primary to the statewide general election. Supporters, including the League of Women Voters and many educators, argued the change would increase turnout and make the electorate more representative. The Orange County Board of Education opposed the bill, saying it would increase costs, reduce local control, and bury education races on crowded general-election ballots. The chair and members discussed turnout, cost, and representation, but the bill was held pending a quorum. Senator Grove presented SB 373, which adds safeguards for California students placed in out-of-state non-public schools through IEPs. The bill would require more robust LEA and CDE oversight, including annual site visits, student interviews, quarterly contact, stronger certification standards, and restrictions on prone, supine, and mechanical restraints. Testimony from a survivor of an out-of-state placement and from advocates emphasized abuse, neglect, and the need for stronger monitoring. There was broad support and no opposition testimony, but the measure was also held pending a quorum. Senator Ashby presented SB 568, the epinephrine in schools modernization act, to clarify and expand requirements for stocked epinephrine so they clearly apply to all public schools, including preschool programs. School nurses and medical experts said the bill would close gaps created by universal preschool and ensure life-saving treatment is available for anaphylaxis. The committee discussed dosing and implementation, and the bill was supported without opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 414, the Charter School Accountability Act, which would strengthen fiscal oversight, audit standards, and transparency for charter schools and authorizers. Supporters said it responds to fraud and audit findings while preserving charter flexibility; opponents, including school employees and teachers, said it did not go far enough on authorizer accountability and small-district oversight. After discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to pass SB 414 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also briefly heard SB 743 by Senator Cortese, which would create an equalization reserve account to provide additional funding to underfunded school districts and reduce funding inequities tied to ZIP code. The author said the bill would support student achievement and teacher retention over time. The transcript cuts off before testimony or action on SB 743 was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• IDEIDA just says not to be in the IEP.
• It the IEP team must make that decision.
• We had the initial bill had taken off IEP facilitation in this language, and we had just added IEP facilitation
• We had the initial bill had taken off IEP facilitation in this language, and we had just added IEP facilitation
• facilitated team meeting is an IEP team meeting.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:16.240> are and right now just like IEPs are and right now just like IEPs are individualized
• Um, I'll open it up for together an IEP.
• So, we're often not changing their IEP.
• And so can IEP goal or stated service.
• Um, with that, we changing their IEP.

Bills: HF4893

Keywords: education finance, student support, aid allowances, appropriation, school funding

Transcript Highlights:

• myself and having a child who has an IEP.
• myself and having a child who has an IEP.
• myself and having a child who has an IEP.
• who has an IEP.
• who has an IEP.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• costs in uh our IEP teams, you know, costs in uh our IEP teams, you know, spending<00:31:51.519> that
• And from the way I read this, it's unclear about if that child has an IEP or a 504 plan.
• Are they responsible for the IEP plan?
• Are they responsible for the the IEP Are they responsible for the the IEP plan?
• was moving over, we would start the IEP was moving over, we would start the IEP process<00:40:30.560

Keywords: 1191, senate, all