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