| TO: | Honorable Kent Grusendorf, Chair, House Committee on Public Education |
| FROM: | John S. O'Brien, Deputy Director, Legislative Budget Board |
| IN RE: | HB308 by Hope (Relating to discipline in public schools and the assignment of certain public school students involved in a sexual assault.), As Introduced |
The bill would require a school district to transfer a student victim of sexual assault or aggravated sexual assault to another campus or school district upon parental request. If the student victim does not wish to transfer, the bill would require a school district to transfer the offender to another campus, or if no other campus serves the grade level, to the district’s Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP) or Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP). The bill further requires that school district’s DAEP be located in a facility other than a regular school campus and it removes any limitation imposed on the length of placement in a JJAEP.
While there would be no direct significant fiscal impact to the Foundation School Program, the bill would likely result in an increase in the number of juveniles enrolled and the length of time a student spends in a Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP) or in a Disciplinary Alternative Education Program. JJAEPs are funded through a set-aside in the Foundation School Program for the Texas Juvenile Probation Commission (TJPC). According to TJPC estimates, there could be potential fiscal impact of up to $1,838,794 in fiscal year 2006 and $4,907,148 in fiscal year 2007 and thereafter. However, costs could be significantly lower depending upon the actual number of referrals to JJAEPs and the number of referrals to DAEPs, which are funded at the local level.
The sections within the bill that relate to the transfer of students would apply beginning with the 2004-2005 school year. The section that would require school district’s DAEPs to be located in a facility other than a regular school campus, would apply beginning with the 2005-2006 school year.
Local school districts will incur additional administratrive and instructional costs associated with implementing the provisions of the bill.
School districts would incur some administrative costs associated with processing transfers. However, because on average the number of student victims per district is relatively low and because many districts already have well-established procedures for reassigning students from one campus to another, it is assumed that the administrative burden would not result in a significant additional ongoing cost.
School districts would likely incur some level of instructional costs associated with providing additional courses to students who are permanently barred from regular campus and classroom settings because off-campus Disciplinary Alternative Education Programs (DAEPs) and JJAEPs are not required to offer all the courses needed to satisfy graduation requirements. However, because of the relatively small population of students that would be subject to the permanent prohibition, it is assumed that these costs would not be significant on a statewide basis.
There would likely be substantial costs for school districts in complying with the requirement that programs be located in a facility other than a regular school campus. According to information gathered by the Texas Education Agency, 76 percent of districts do not currently maintain a separate DAEP-only campus. Assuming that trends in placement to DAEPs remain stable, school districts would need to accommodate at least 46,000 additional students in separate facilities beginning with school year 2005-06, according to the Texas Education Agency. This would likely be in the millions of dollars on a statewide basis. In addition, separate campuses will lead to an increase in administration and management, thereby increasing the ongoing administrative expenditures.
| Source Agencies: | 665 Juvenile Probation Commission, 701 Central Education Agency
|
| LBB Staff: | JOB, CT, UP, KC
|