Relating to the compensatory education allotment for homeless students or students in foster care under the Foundation School Program.
Summary
SB 2937 would increase the compensatory education allotment for certain high-need students under Texas’s Foundation School Program. Specifically, it changes the formula for school districts receiving funding for students who are homeless or who are in the conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services (foster care), setting the annual allotment at 2.41 times the basic allotment. Under current law, the allotment is tied to the highest weight provided under a different subsection; the bill replaces that reference with a fixed multiplier.
The bill is narrowly focused on school finance and does not create a new program or eligibility category. Its practical effect would be to increase state aid for districts serving homeless and foster-care students, which could support compensatory education services, academic interventions, counseling, and other supports for students facing instability or trauma. The change would take effect September 1, 2025.
Impact
SB 2937 amends Section 48.104(e-1) of the Texas Education Code, altering the Foundation School Program funding formula for homeless students and students in foster care. By specifying a 2.41 multiplier of the basic allotment, the bill would increase the amount of state funding districts receive for each eligible student and replace the prior cross-reference to the highest weight under another subsection. The affected parties are school districts, the state school finance system, and students who are homeless or in DFPS conservatorship.
Sentiment
The available context shows no recorded committee testimony or floor votes, so there is no documented public debate in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s subject matter, the measure appears to be a targeted funding increase for vulnerable students, which typically draws support from education and child-welfare advocates. The referral to the Education K-16 committee suggests it was being considered as a school finance and student-support measure.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided transcripts or votes. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill text, would likely concern the fiscal cost of increasing the allotment, whether the 2.41 multiplier is the appropriate funding level, and how the change would affect state appropriations and district budgeting. Any disagreement would most likely be between supporters of expanded student services and those concerned about state spending or formula changes.