Honorable Brandon Creighton, Chair, Senate Committee on Education K-16
FROM:
Jerry McGinty, Director, Legislative Budget Board
IN RE:
HB120 by Bell, Keith (Relating to career and technology education programs in public schools, the Financial Aid for Swift Transfer (FAST) program, the Rural Pathway Excellence Partnership (R-PEP) program, and a high school advising program, including funding for those programs under the Foundation School Program, and to the new instructional facility allotment and the permissible uses of funding under the Foundation School Program.), As Engrossed
Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB120, As Engrossed: a negative impact of ($349,808,138) through the biennium ending August 31, 2027.
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
2026
($149,131,862)
2027
($200,676,276)
2028
($215,495,487)
2029
($219,944,277)
2030
($217,796,838)
All Funds, Five-Year Impact:
Fiscal Year
Probable Savings/(Cost) from General Revenue Fund 1
Probable Savings/(Cost) from Foundation School Fund 193
Probable Revenue Gain/(Loss) from Recapture Payments Atten Crdts 8905
Change in Number of State Employees from FY 2025
2026
($2,602,493)
($146,529,369)
($13,744,440)
1.0
2027
($2,917,452)
($197,758,824)
($25,460,917)
1.0
2028
($2,386,281)
($213,109,206)
($27,457,819)
1.0
2029
($2,386,281)
($217,557,996)
($32,293,352)
1.0
2030
($2,386,281)
($215,410,557)
($27,016,327)
1.0
Fiscal Analysis
The bill would allow students who have graduated from high school but are enrolled in a district or charter school designated as a Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P-TECH) or Rural Pathway Excellence Partnership (R-PEP) school and are completing a course of study offered through the P-TECH or R-PEP programs to enroll at no cost in a dual credit course under the Financial Aid for Swift Transfer (FAST) program.
The bill would include courses under a Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC) program in what is considered career and technology education (CTE) programs and for which a district could generate entitlement under the Career and Technology Education Allotment under the Foundation School Program (FSP).
The bill would increase the number of subsidies students may receive for CTE certification examinations from one to two and would provide a subsidy to teachers completing certain certification examinations related to CTE instead of cybersecurity.
The bill would establish the Military Pathway Grant Program which would provide funds to school districts to establish a JROTC program for students enrolled in high school in the district, administer the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery test, and provide career counseling to participating students. Each participating district would receive a grant of $50,000 and the total amount of grants that could be awarded would be limited to $2 million each year.
The bill would create a high school advising program, administered by TEA, which would support participating districts and open-enrollment charter schools in providing college, career, or military advising support to students.
Participating districts and open-enrollment charter schools would be required to have a partnership agreement with an institution of higher education to support students from high school graduation to postsecondary completion, and a partnership agreement with a career and technical education program at a institution of higher education, an employer, a branch of the armed services or National Guard, or a local workforce board, to support students from high school graduation to workforce entry.
Advisors would be required to be trained in practices relating to college, career, and military advising and supported by additional guidance provided by the agency. Advisors could not have caseloads of more than 200 students and must prioritize students in grade levels 11 and 12. Advisors would be required to spend at least 80 percent of their time on college, career, and military advising.
The bill would grant rulemaking authority to the commissioner to implement the high school advising program, and would require the commissioner to consult with Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) and Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB).
The bill would extend the allowable uses of funds under the New Instructional Facilities Allotment (NIFA) and would increase the amount appropriated for NIFA from $100 million to $150 million each year.
The bill would entitle districts to reimbursement for not more than two certification examinations per student.
The bill would establish the High School Advising Allotment under the FSP. The allotment would provide $40,000 for each full-time equivalent advisor or contracted service provider under the high school advising program and would limit the number of advisors for whom a district may receive the allotment to one advisor per 200 students enrolled in the district in grade levels 11 and 12. Beginning in the fifth school year, the allotment would be reduced by 20 percent for each school year, unless the district's performance for the school year meets certain criteria.
Methodology
THECB states that costs relating to providing dual credit courses to students who have graduated under the FAST program cannot be determined at this time as data on the number of students who would qualify for the additional funding is not available.
TEA assumes there would be a cost to the state if the State Board of Education (SBOE) were to adopt TEKS for JROTC courses to be included in a CTE program. TEA assumes $34,200 in committee costs would be required in fiscal year 2026 to develop TEKS recommendations.
TEA estimates costs to provide up to two subsidies per student and one subsidy per teacher for passing CTE certification examinations to be $281,798 annually.
The agency assumes the cost to provide grants to districts to establish a JROTC program would be limited by the $2.0 million cap each fiscal year.
THECB assumes any costs associated with implementation of the bill could be absorbed using existing resources.
TEA assumes 1.0 FTE would be required to implement the provisions of the bill for a cost of $0.1 million in each fiscal year.
The bill would amend or create allotments under the FSP as outlined in the Fiscal Analysis section above. This analysis assumes that the total cost to the FSP would be $146.5 million in fiscal year 2026, $197.8 million in fiscal year 2027, increasing to $215.4 million in fiscal year 2030.
The cost to the FSP includes estimated decreases in Recapture Payments - Attendance Credits revenue of $13.7 million in fiscal year 2026, $25.5 million in fiscal year 2027, increasing to $27.0 million in fiscal year 2030
Technology
TEA assumes IT costs associated with implementing the provisions of the bill would be $0.2 million in fiscal year 2026 and $0.5 million in fiscal year 2027.
Local Government Impact
This analysis assumes local education agencies would receive additional funding through the FSP under the bill.
Source Agencies:
701 Texas Education Agency, 781 Higher Education Coordinating Board, 966 Howard College, 978 San Jacinto College