LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Austin, Texas
FISCAL NOTE, 77th Regular Session
April 10, 2001
TO: Honorable Toby Goodman, Chair, House Committee on
Juvenile Justice & Family Issues
FROM: John Keel, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE: HB2108 by Turner, Sylvester (Relating to placement into
a juvenile justice alternative education program of
children with disabilities who receive special education
services.), As Introduced
**************************************************************************
* Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for *
* HB2108, As Introduced: negative impact of $(4,000,000) 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 $(2,000,000) *
* 2003 (2,000,000) *
* 2004 (2,000,000) *
* 2005 (2,000,000) *
* 2006 (2,000,000) *
****************************************************
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
*****************************************************
* Fiscal Year Probable Savings/(Cost) from *
* Foundation School Fund *
* 0193 *
* 2002 $(2,000,000) *
* 2003 (2,000,000) *
* 2004 (2,000,000) *
* 2005 (2,000,000) *
* 2006 (2,000,000) *
*****************************************************
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would prohibit the placement in a juvenile justice alternative
education program (JJAEP) of a student with disabilities who has been
expelled. The bill would further require that the school district
expelling the student provide an educational program to the student in
accordance with the student's individual education plan (IEP) for the
duration of the expulsion.
Methodology
If it is assumed that a student subject to mandatory expulsion who can no
longer be placed in a JJAEP due to this bill is served through some
other placement within the district rather than being expelled to the
street, the district would retain the ability to generate state aid via
the student's attendance. In this scenario, the bill would have fiscal
implications for the Foundation School Program. Based on TEA data
concerning placement lengths for special education students in JJAEPs for
the 1999-2000 school year (which equal about 250 students in special
education arrangements), it appears that the additional state aid earned
would be about $2.0 million annually.
Under current law, a student who is placed in a JJAEP generates state
funding for the JJAEP through a set-aside from the Compensatory
Education program. As a result, there is no extra state general revenue
cost when a child is placed in a JJAEP because the funding is already
included in the appropriations to the Foundation School Program.
Local Government Impact
Under current federal law, school districts are responsible for the
provision of a free and appropriate public education for students with
disabilities. Because school districts have retained this liability
even when expelled students are placed in a JJAEP, it is assumed that
the provision of services has remained a district obligation under
current law and will continue to remain a district obligation under this
bill. However, districts would attain additional state aid to offset
the costs of services if the expelled student who would otherwise be in
a JJAEP is served via another type of district placement. The
additional state aid that could be earned is estimated to be about $2.0
million annually.
Source Agencies: 665 Texas Juvenile Probation Commission, 701
Texas Education Agency
LBB Staff: JK, JC, RN