As a Georgia educator I have taught my fair share of gifted classes, and I have deep reservations about the financial impact of the commission's proposal to merge all categories of special education students with gifted students into one funding category, "exceptional." [Furthermore, the subcommittee is opening the door to replacing the specifically-defined category of "gifted" with a more encompassing students "participating in advanced coursework."]
The proposed changes could result in more funding being steered to systems who have proportionally more "gifted" students (and students taking advanced coursework) than they have students with disabilities.
Working from data available from the Governor's Office of Student Achievement, I calculated the ratio of gifted students to students with disabilities for each system in the state. For example, Decatur City has 2.45 gifted students for each student with disabilities, while Dougherty County proportionally has fewer than half (.426) the number of gifted students compared to the number of students with disabilities on their rosters. I then plotted this ratio of Gifted/SWD against the percentage of economically disadvantaged students in each system.
The obvious trend is that schools with higher portions of economically disadvantaged students have more students with disabilities and fewer students identified as gifted. A significant change in how the state funds the newly conflated category of "exceptional" students could adversely impact districts with higher levels of economically disadvantaged students. Also, the funding proposal does little to ensure adequate funding for the most profoundly disabled students.
The current QBE model provides different funding weights for students depending upon the degree of their impairment. Students with profound disabilities earn more funds for a school system to offset the cost for the teachers and paraprofessionals who serve them. Students with less limiting learning disabilities qualify for less funding.
Under the current funding rules, a non-exceptional grades 9-12 student earns 1.0 FTE as a funding weight. A gifted students earns 1.6597 FTE, while a student receiving special education services earns between 2.3810 FTE and 5.7555 FTE. [Those funding formulas are explained in detail at the Georgia DOE website].
The funding subcommittee's discussion of "Weighting Considerations" indicate the commission is looking to replace this existing needs-based reimbursement with funding weighted only by the portion of the day a student receives "exceptional" services--gifted, advanced courses (?), or special education.
To this point, nothing has been published with real data to show the true impact of the funding change on SWD students and systems. Indeed, the subcommittee is still wrestling with the ramifications of this proposal, including (apparently) how funding for students with autism or specific learning disabilities could affect the funds distribution. Their meeting materials indicate this concern: "Including students with those two primary disabilities [autism and specific learning disability] in a weighting category defined by disability would effectively skew the funding to be either an overpayment or an underpayment."
After the funding subcommittee cancelled its April meeting, Governor Deal extended to December 18 his August 1 deadline for the full commission to ratify his "student-based" funding proposal. The plan is now for a special joint legislative committee to review and act on the completed funding scheme in 2016.
While the commission members suggest there will be a "hold harmless" period to give systems time to adjust to reductions in funding levels, this commission and the special joint legislative committee must publish the precise result of the new funding formulas on districts and clearly indicate the impact on the funds available to serve our students with disabilities.
This education reform commission must not become a vehicle for redistributing funds away from schools serving the most challenged students.
