LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 77th Regular Session
March 27, 2001
TO: Honorable Paul Sadler, Chair, House Committee on Public
Education
FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB1144 by Grusendorf (Relating to public school
accountability.), Committee Report 1st House, Substituted
**************************************************************************
* Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for *
* HB1144, Committee Report 1st House, Substituted: negative impact *
* of $(888,188) through the biennium ending August 31, 2003. *
* *
* The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal *
* basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of *
* the bill. *
**************************************************************************
General Revenue-Related Funds, Five-Year Impact:
****************************************************
* Fiscal Year Probable Net Positive/(Negative) *
* Impact to General Revenue Related *
* Funds *
* 2002 $(594,094) *
* 2003 (294,094) *
* 2004 (94,094) *
* 2005 (204,890) *
* 2006 (204,890) *
****************************************************
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
***************************************************************************
*Fiscal Probable Savings/(Cost) from Change in Number of State *
* Year General Revenue Fund Employees from FY 2001 *
* 0001 *
* 2002 $(594,094) 2.0 *
* 2003 (294,094) 2.0 *
* 2004 (94,094) 2.0 *
* 2005 (204,890) 4.0 *
* 2006 (204,890) 4.0 *
***************************************************************************
Technology Impact
Section 1 of the bill as substituted requires coordination of databases
between the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Texas Higher Education
Coordinating Board (THECB), which would likely necessitate contract
efforts to match student-level data. The voluntary rating system
mandated by section 3 would likely have some impact on data requirements
at TEA.
Fiscal Analysis
Section 1 of the bill as substituted requires the development of a
coordinated student-level database for student performance information
across primary, secondary and post-secondary school.
Section 2 would permit but not require the commissioner of education to
participate in multi-state end-of-course test development, and requires
the development of an end-of-course test for Algebra I.
Section 3 directs the development of a voluntary rating system, although
the existence of the system is mandatory.
Methodology
Section 1: The database systems modifications that would be needed to
assure consistent, K-16 identification of students is roughly estimated
to be a one-time cost of $500,000 in 2002. (TEA and THECB have committed
to working together to coordinate their systems, but the cost estimate
for the database remains $500,000.)
Section 2: TEA estimates that collaboration with the Southern Region
Education Board in exploring multi-state end-of-course test development
would incur a one-time cost of $500,000. However this cost, as an
assessment development expense, would be covered by a set-aside from the
compensatory education allotment of the Foundation School Program, and
thus entail no net cost to the state.
TEA has already developed an end-of-course Algebra I exam, so there is no
cost to this provision. Any future maintenance and administration costs
would be funded from the compensatory education allotment, and thus be
of no net cost.
Section 3: It is estimated that one program administrator and one
administrative technician, with annual support costs of $94,094, as well
as a one-time $200,000 contract in 2003, would be needed to assist the
advisory committee in developing the voluntary gold performance rating
system from 2002 to 2004. Section 3(d) of the bill requires
implementation of the system "beginning with 2006-2007 school year or an
earlier school year." The agency estimates that a three-year development
period (from 2002 to 2004) would be adequate, thus making the 2004-05
school year the appropriate year for implementation of the system.
Upon implementation of the system in 2005, it is estimated that an
additional two program administrators would be needed to administer the
voluntary rating system, at an additional annual cost of $110,796.
Local Government Impact
No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is
anticipated.
To the extent that test development draws funds from the compensatory
education allotment of the Foundation School Program, there would be a
small reduction of state aid to districts.
Source Agencies: 701 Texas Education Agency, 781 Texas Higher
Education Coordinating Board
LBB Staff: JK, CT, PF, JM