COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
!"#"$%&'
()*&((+
for
Exceptional
Children
FISCAL YEAR
2013
BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR SPECIAL AND GIFTED
EDUCATION
COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
CEC MISSION
The Council for Exceptional Children is an international community of professionals who are the voice
and vision of special and gifted education. CEC’s mission is to improve, through excellence and advocacy,
the education and quality of life for children and youth with exceptionalities and to enhance the
engagement of their families.
CEC VISION
The Council for Exceptional Children is a premier education organization, internationally renowned for
its expertise and leadership, working collaboratively with strategic partners to ensure that children
and youth with exceptionalities are valued and full participating members of society. As a diverse and
vibrant professional community, CEC is a trusted voice in shaping education practice and policy.
CEC’s Federal Outlook for Exceptional Children is an annual publication that provides up-to-date
CEC is pleased to present its recommendations to assist policy makers and others concerned with the
provision of appropriate services for children and youth with exceptionalities.r
2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 1000
Arlington, VA 22202
www.cec.sped.org
COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
!"#"$%&'
()*&((+
for
Exceptional
Children
FISCAL YEAR
2013
BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR SPECIAL AND GIFTED
EDUCATION
ISBN 0-86586-470-5
Copyright © April 2012 by the Council for Exceptional Children
2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 1000, Arlington, VA 22202.
Stock No. P6062
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without prior written permission of the copyright owner.
Printed in the United States of America.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
*%,&"'(!''
-(.*".*/
FOREWORD................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Fiscal Year 2013 Appropriation Recommendations for Federal Programs for the Education of Exceptional Children ............................................. 9
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT (IDEA)
Part B: State and Local Grant Program............................................................................................................................................................ 11
Part B: Preschool Grants Program (Section 619) ............................................................................................................................................. 19
Part C: Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities Program .................................................................................................................................... 27
Part D: Support Programs .............................................................................................................................................................................. 35
Subpart 1, Sec. 651-655—State Personnel Development Grants ........................................................................................................................ 39
Subpart 2, Sec. 662—Personnel Preparation ..................................................................................................................................................... 43
Subpart 2, Sec. 663—Technical Assistance, Model Demonstration Projects, and Dissemination of Information .................................................... 45
Subpart 3, Sec 671, 672, 673—Parent Training and Information Centers, Community Parent Resource Centers,
and Technical Assistance for Parent Training and Information Centers ................................................................................................... 47
Subpart 3, Sec 674—Technical Development, Demonstration, and Utilization; and Media Services ..................................................................... 49
RESEARCH IN SPECIAL EDUCATION ................................................................................................................................................... 51
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT ................................................................................... 55
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013
!($"0($#
FOREWORD FROM THE CEC PRESIDENT
Members of the Council for Exceptional Children believe that every child deserves access to an environment that
fosters academic, developmental, and social growth. As professionals who work daily to achieve this goal, CEC’s
33,000 members take great pride in preparing our nation’s 10 million children and youth with exceptionalities—
those with disabilities and/or gifts and talents—for a lifetime of success.
Over the last 37 years, children and youth with disabilities have received increased supports and services, and
access to the general education curriculum—resulting in achievement gains and higher expectations for their
performance. Although these accomplishments are not entirely due to funding increases, the reality is that
appropriate supports and services require resources.
When Congress originally passed IDEA, it promised that the federal government would pay 40% of the excess cost of providing special
education and related services. Yet, over these many years, Congress has never lived up to this promise. After 3 years of a serious fiscal crisis,
schools around the nation are dealing with a double funding cliff—both the loss of stimulus monies and the decline in state and local
revenues caused by one of the worst recessions in our nation’s history. To ensure that children and youth with exceptionalities continue to
receive the services they are entitled to, and that they need to thrive, Congress must pursue mandatory full funding of IDEA.
Our nation must also do more to invest in the 3 million students with gifts and talents whose needs often go unmet. In 1993, former Secretary
of Education Richard Riley dubbed the lack of gifted education a “quiet crisis” for our country. Yet, nearly 2 decades later, the availability of
gifted education still varies dramatically between and within states, leaving many of our nation’s schools ill-equipped to meet unique learning
needs. At a time when our country should be committed to producing creative problem solvers to compete in an innovative global society, the
Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act is the only federal initiative that seeks to build the nation’s capacity in this area. Yet,
in FY 2012 it received no funding. This cannot stand in FY 2013.
By investing in education for our nation’s children, we enable individual growth and productivity that will lead to economic prosperity for
our nation, and a life of financial independence, dignity, and self-fulfillment for those with exceptionalities. CEC calls on Congress and the
Administration to lead our nation by making IDEA increases permanent and by providing a substantial investment in gifted education.
Margaret J. McLaughlin
President
Council for Exceptional Children
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 1
1%$*','
State and Local Grant Program
2
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
"2"-)*34"'/)55%$6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
For the past several years, the nation has been in the throes of a deepening fiscal crisis. As a result, the federal government and most state and
local governments have repeatedly been forced to cut all major programs including education. A recent report from the Center for Budget Policy
and Priorities found that 23 states had made “identifiable, deep cuts” in education spending in FY 2012. CEC members have seen class sizes and
caseloads increase, while access to professional development and training decrease. Moreover, because of the reductions that have already been
made there is simply less to cut—meaning future cuts will impact the classroom directly, even more.
In August of 2011, with the passage of the Budget Control Act, Congress set in motion a process called “sequestration”. We discuss this more fully
at the end of this section but, in general, this process is meant to control the deficit and further cut domestic discretionary spending over the next
decade. One immediate result education programs and professionals are now facing is the looming, across the board cut to all education programs
(and other government programs) of approximately 8%. This cut is set to be imposed on January 1, 2013 if Congress and the Administration don’t
act to change the law.
As the stories in this book demonstrate, for children and youth with disabilities and/or those with gifts and talents to thrive they must have well
prepared professionals to serve them and adequate services and supports in place to meet their needs. In light of the cuts already imposed by state
and local governments all across the nation, another 8% cut to all federal education funding—including IDEA—is unacceptable and will only
damage our ability to educate our nation’s youth. CEC calls on Congress to weigh all options and consider the potential impact of this across-theboard cut on students, families, professionals, and communities before allowing it to deny resources and supports to those who need them most.
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT
CEC calls on Congress and the Administration to fulfill the
longstanding promise to children and youth with disabilities,
their families, and educators by increasing funding for all
parts of IDEA, and reinstating “glide path” funding, thus,
guaranteeing full funding for IDEA Part B Grants to States by
2022.
„
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has literally
transformed the education of students with disabilities since its
inception. Thanks to IDEA, today children and youth with disabilities
are now routinely served in public schools and have access to the
education which had been denied to them for too long.
Originally enacted as The Education for All Handicapped Children
Act in 1975, IDEA mandates the right to a free appropriate public
education (FAPE) for children and youth with disabilities and seeks
to create an education system that builds on students’ strengths and
addresses individuals’ needs. IDEA provides children and youth, birth
through 21, with access to critical resources needed to excel in their
development, both in the classroom and in society. Federal research
shows that an investment in the development and education of
children with disabilities from birth throughout their school years
has rewards and benefits, not only for children with disabilities but
society as a whole. Thanks to IDEA, today, approximately 6.5 million
children with disabilities receive early intervention, special education,
and related services in public schools across the nation.
From the very beginning, when IDEA was first enacted, Congress
recognized that providing the supports and accommodations it
called for to children and youth with disabilities would increase the
average cost of education for these children. Congress calculated
the federal share of this additional cost by taking 40% of the
national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) multiplied by
the number of children with disabilities served by IDEA in each
state. This federal share is commonly referred to as the “IDEA full
funding” amount. In 1975, IDEA authorized the federal government
to pay the federal share or 40% for each state by 1981, intending for
local communities and states to provide the balance of funding in
the meantime and for the federal government to pay the full 40%
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 3
"2"-)*34"'/)55%$6
thereafter. But Congress has never appropriated the full federal
share—even with the boost from economic stimulus monies in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). As a result, IDEA
has been underfunded for over 3 decades.
Federal underfunding has caused many special education programs
to struggle to provide the services the law requires. In addition,
local communities have shouldered a disproportionate share of the
cost of special education and early intervention programs. In 2004,
recognizing that it never fully funded IDEA, Congress approved a
“glide path” of incremental authorization levels leading to a fully
funded IDEA by 2011. Yet, every year since then (with the one-time
exception of monies included in ARRA) Congress has again failed to
live up to its promise.
The time has come for full funding to be a reality. Since 1975, CEC
has been a leading advocate for full funding of IDEA. On behalf
of its more than 33,000 members, CEC calls on Congress and the
Administration to fulfill the longstanding promise to children and
youth with disabilities, their families, and educators by reinstating a
responsible “glide path” to full funding and guaranteeing full funding
for IDEA by FY2022.
Since 1975, the Council for Exceptional Children
(CEC) has been a leading advocate for full funding of
IDEA. Today approximately 6.5 million children with
disabilities receive early intervention, special
education, and/or related services provided by IDEA.
Although the full funding discussion in the policy arena has focused
entirely on the Part B Grants to States program, CEC continues to
advocate for increased funding for the Preschool Program (Part B Sec.
619), Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities Program (Part C), and
IDEA Support Programs (Part D).
Unfortunately, despite increased enrollment and program need in
IDEA Part C Infants and Toddlers with Disabilities Program serving
children ages birth to 2, it has repeatedly been cut and only recently
received a $5 million increase in FY 2012. Although CEC appreciates
the $5 million dollar increase, much more is needed to address the
need. Additionally, research suggests early intervention programs
play a vital role in addressing the individual developmental needs
and improved educational outcomes for infants and toddlers and
their families. Outcomes for young children continue to improve.
This creates a lasting cost savings as children are able to exit out
of special education or need less intensive services over the course
of their school career. Yet, here again, similar to IDEA Part B Grants
to States, when federal funding fails to fulfill its share, states must
cover the shortfall. With more and more states facing ongoing fiscal
crises, programs for infants and toddlers with disabilities are forced to
restrict services, reevaluate eligibility criteria, and deny children and
families the frequency of services they need and deserve.
4
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Additionally, funding for IDEA’s Part B Section 619 program which
serves children ages 3 to 5, has also remained stagnant for many
years. Here, unlike IDEA Part C, there have been no increases in the
federal government’s investment. Instead, it has decreased in recent
years. For example, in 1992, the federal government spent $803 per
child whereas the President’s FY 2013 budget request would provide
only $507 per child. Yet the same research about the positive impact
of early intervention that we have seen for children ages birth to 2
holds true for ages 3 to 5 as well.
funding for research in special education by 28%. This substantial
cut—in real dollars close to $20 million dollars—will severely limit
the field’s ability to innovate. CEC urges Congress to reverse this
course and increase investment in research for education—including
special education—and to enable NCSER to achieve the goal of
sponsoring research to expand knowledge and understanding of
children and youth with disabilities and ultimately to improve their
developmental, educational, and transitional outcomes.
Also troubling is the fact that IDEA’s Support Programs (Part
D)—which provides critical infrastructure, training, research, and
development functions necessary to drive improvements and access
to evidence-based practices in all aspects of special education
practice—only make up 2% of the total IDEA budget and has
been cut in recent years. It is also important to point out that these
competitive grant programs did not receive a penny of stimulus
dollars, and they continue to struggle to meet the needs of the field.
EDUCATION SCIENCES REFORM ACT
CEC urges Congress to increase its investment in research for
special education to $200.5 million to better equip educators
with the tools they need to implement evidence-based
practices.
„
With the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act in 2004 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act/No
Child Left Behind Act in 2001, the need for evidence-and scientifically
based practices is of utmost importance to schools and educators
nationwide. In passing the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA) in
2002, Congress established the Institute for Education Sciences (IES),
which later acquired special education research with the creation
of the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER). The
goal of NCSER is to fund research and innovation activities for the
education of children and youth with disabilities and thus, provide
educators and stakeholders with resources critical to the education of
children and youth with disabilities.
Unfortunately, despite the emphasis on evidence-and scientifically
based practices in IDEA and ESEA, in 2011 Congress voted to cut
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 5
"2"-)*34"'/)55%$6
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED
STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT
CEC strongly urges Congress to demonstrate its commitment
to students with gifts and talents by reinstating funding for
the Javits Act and by providing a substantial investment of
$20 million dollars. Further CEC urges Congress to include a
focus on students with gifts and talents in appropriate federal
legislation.
„
advanced learners, even though every student with gifts and talents
deserves to have access to a challenging educational experience.
Therefore, CEC strongly urges Congress to demonstrate its
commitment to students with gifts and talents by restoring funding
for the Javits Act and increasing it to $20 million dollars.
THE BUDGET CONTROL ACT OF 2011
On August 2, 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget
Control Act of 2011 (BCA), increasing our nation’s debt limit and
At a time when the United States is trying to regain its position as a
global leader, there is only one, small federal program that addresses imposing a series of measures to limit spending and decrease the
the unique learning needs of 3 million students with gifts and talents, nation’s debt.
the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act.
The BCA calls for $900 million in cuts to discretionary programs,
Currently, there is no federal investment in students with gifts and
including education, over the next decade. It also created a Joint
talents. This must change.
Select Committee (referred to as the “Supercommittee”) made up of
members from the House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans
The Javits Act focuses on students from backgrounds that have
charged with finding $1.2 trillion more in cuts over the next decade. If
traditionally been underrepresented in gifted education programs
the Supercommittee failed to identify this savings, or Congress failed
such as students with disabilities, English language learners, and
to approve the Supercommittee’s recommendation, then on January
students from economically disadvantaged situations. This program
1, 2013 sequestration, which means automatic across-the-board cuts
funds a system of competitive research and state capacity-building
grants and a national research center on gifted education, helping to to every federal program not specifically excluded, will begin.
fill a critical need in our nation’s education system.
The Supercommittee failed, and now sequestration will begin, unless
Congress and the Administration act to change the law. At the time
Dubbed the “quiet crisis” by former U.S. Secretary of Education
of publication, several members of the House of Representatives
Richard Riley in 1993, the availability of gifted education still varies
dramatically between and within states, leaving many of our nation’s have proposed legislation that would prohibit sequestration from
impacting Department of Defense programs, but there has not been
schools underprepared to meet the educational needs of millions of
any similar legislation proposed to address education.
PROGRAMS EXCLUDED FROM BCA’S ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS (SEQUESTRATION)
6
r4PDJBM4FDVSJUZ
r'PPE4UBNQT
r$FSUBJO5BY$SFEJUT
r.FEJDBJE
r$IJME/VUSJUJPO
r'FEFSBM3FUJSFNFOU#FOFGJUT
r$)*1
r7FUFSBOT#FOFGJUT
r.FEJDBSFVQUPB$BQQFE"NPVOU
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan office that advises Congress on the implications of its proposals has estimated that
sequestration will mean a cut of approximately 8% to all education programs. This means that the entire U.S. Department of Education’s
budget will be reduced by approximately $3.5 billion. In real dollars, this likely means the following cuts will occur as of January 1,
2013:
„ Part B Grants to States for School-Aged Students
CUT BY $895 MILLION
„ Part B Section 619 Grants to States for Preschool Children
CUT BY $30 MILLION
„ Part C Grants to States for Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities
CUT BY $35 MILLION
„ Special Education Research
CUT BY $4 MILLIO/
These cuts will be felt by every single school in the nation and will impact educators’ ability to serve children and youth with disabilities
and/or those with gifts and talents appropriately. Furthermore, they come at a time when other cuts reduce essential services. Therefore,
CEC calls on Congress to weigh all options and consider the potential impact of this across-the-board cut on students, families,
professionals, and communities before allowing it to deny resources and supports to those who need them most.
IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATION TO U.S. ECONOMY
“An educated population is a key source of economic growth....Broad access to education was, by and large,
a major factor in the United States economic dominance in the 20th century and in the creation of a broad
middle class. Indeed, the American dream of upward mobility both within and across generations has been tied
to access to education.”
)BSWBSE&DPOPNJTUT$MBVEJB(PMEJOBOE-BXSFODF,BU[
“The Future of Inequality: The Other Reason Education Matters So Much”
.JLFO*OTUJUVUF3FWJFX
Third Quarter 2009
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FY 2013 Appropriation Recommendations for Federal Programs
for the Education of Exceptional Children Dollars (in thousands)
PROGRAMS
FY 2009
APPROPRIATION
ARRA OF 2009
APPROPRIATION
FY 2010
APPROPRIATION
FY 2011
APPROPRIATION
FY 2012
APPROPRIATION
FY 2013 CEC
RECOMMENDED
Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA)
11,505,211
11,300,000
11,505,211
11,466,000
Part B - Preschool
Grants Program
374,099
400,000
374,099
373,400
372,600
1,102,500
Part C - Infants and Toddlers
With Disabilities Program
439,427
500,000
439,427
438,500
442,700
984,427
State Personnel
Development Grants
48,000
0
48,000
46,800
43,900
188,774
Personnel Preparation
90,653
0
90,653
88,500
88,300
365,748
Technical Assistance, Projects,
Dissemination Implementation
of Scientifically Based Research
48,549
0
49,549
48,800
46,800
188,774
Parent Information Centers
27,028
0
28,028
28,000
28,900
117,984
Technology Development,
Demonstration and Utilization;
and Media Services
38,615
0
43,973
28,600
29,600
117,984
252,845
0
260,203
240,700
237,500
979,264
12,571,5820
12,200,000
12,578,94
12,518,600
70,585
0
71,085
51,000
49,900
200,572
7,463
0
7,463
0
0
20,000
Part B - State and Local
Grant Program
11,577,900 13,644,222
Part D - Support Programs
Part D - Support Programs
Total
IDEA TOTAL
12,630,700 16,710,413
Education Sciences
Reform Act (ESRA)
Research in Special Education
Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA)
Jacob K. Javits Gifted
and Talented Students
Education Act
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 9
1%$*','
State and Local Grant Program
10
| FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2012
1%$*','
State and Local Grant Program
PART B STATE AND LOCAL GRANT PROGRAM
Authorizing Provision
The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, P.L. 94-142; Sections 611-618 (20 USC 1411-1418), as amended by the Education of the
Handicapped Act Amendments of 1983, P.L. 98-199; the Education of the Handicapped Act of 1986, P.L. 99-457; the Amendments of 1990, P.L.
101-476; the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17; and by the Individuals With Disabilities Education
Improvement Act, P.L. 108-446. This program may still be referred to as P.L. 94-142.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
ARRA OF 2009
FY2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY2013
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
11,505,211
11,505,211
11,300,000
11,466,000
11,577,900
13,644,222
PURPOSE
ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act State and Local Grant
Program (commonly known as Part B) is the central vehicle through
which the federal government partners with states and localities
to provide an appropriate education for children and youth with
disabilities, who require special education and related services.
Approximately 6.5 million children with disabilities nationwide, ages
3 through 21, currently receive special education and related services.
For purposes of federal funding, IDEA serves students who require
special education and related services and have any of the following:
intellectual disabilities, hearing impairments (including deafness),
speech or language impairments, visual impairments (including
blindness), serious emotional disturbance, orthopedic impairments,
autism, traumatic brain injury, other health impairments, or specific
learning disabilities. At state and local discretion, this program also
includes children with developmental delay, ages 3 through 9 years.
WHO RECEIVES FUNDING
The federal government distributes funds to state education agencies
(SEAs). State education agencies then make grants to local education
agencies (LEAs) and educational service agencies.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 11
1%$*','
State and Local Grant Program
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
“The impact of the economic crisis is reverberating
throughout school districts nationwide. The fallout of the
subprime loan market and the subsequent decline in housing
values impacts many schools that depend on local property
taxes for funding. This crisis becomes very real in schools—
cuts in educational programs/services, teacher training, and
retention programs—and is only further compounded by
lack of federal funding for special education.”
CEC Advocate
“More than three quarters (84 percent) of Superintendents
described their district as inadequately funded, and three
quarters (77 percent) of Superintendents reported a cut in
state/local revenues between the 2009-10 and 2010-11
school years. Furthermore, 87 percent of Superintendents
surveyed, determined that “covering a federal shortfall year in
and year out with local district dollars represents a significant
funding pressure for school districts across the nations. Full
funding of IDEA would provide services for students with
special education needs and allow local schcool districts to
use local dollars to meet local district budgeting needs.”
Surviving a Thousand Cuts: America’s Public Schools
and the Recession, American Association of School
Administrators
December, 2010
12
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
PART B STATE AND LOCAL GRANT PROGRAM
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEC RECOMMENDS
When Congress originally enacted P.L. 94-142, The Education for
All Handicapped Children Act, in 1975, it authorized the federal
government to pay 40% of each state’s “excess cost” of educating
children with disabilities. That amount—commonly referred to as
the “IDEA full funding” amount—is calculated by taking 40% of the
national average per pupil expenditure (APPE) multiplied by the
number of children with disabilities served under IDEA in each state.
CEC recommends a total of $13.6 billion for FY 2013. For 37 years,
Congress has promised to fully fund IDEA, but has yet to live up to this
promise. As a result, state and local governments have had to bear a
disproportionate share of these necessary costs.
When P.L. 94-142, was enacted, Congress adopted a full-funding
formula that phased in funding increases over 5 years, intending
to reach full funding by 1981, with states and local communities
providing the balance of funding. But Congress has never fully
funded IDEA. Over the years, as the law itself continues to thrive, the
intended federal/state/local cost-sharing partnership has not been
realized because Congress never fulfilled its financial obligation. As a
result, states and local communities have been forced to pay a higher
proportion of the special education costs. But ultimately, children and
families are shortchanged.
With state and local governments experiencing yet another year of
severe budget cuts, it is increasingly difficult for schools to provide
the special education services needed by children and youth with
disabilities. When states confront deep deficits, education funding
and the services it ensures are jeopardized, making an increased
federal investment even more important. Given the economic reality,
and the continually growing and appropriate emphasis on high
educational standards for all students in our nation, the need for an
appropriate federal contribution to Part B is further justified.
CEC calls on Congress and the President to increase federal spending.
Additionally, Congress should make IDEA funding mandatory,
instead of discretionary. Mandatory appropriations would ensure the
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 13
!"#$%&%
State and Local Grant Program
certainty and consistency these programs need and these children
deserve. To reach full funding of the Part B State and Local Grant
Program within 10 years, CEC calls for legislation that guarantees the
following appropriation levels:
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
5PEBZNPSFUIBOFWFSDIJMESFOXJUIEJTBCJMJUJFTMFBSOBMPOHTJEF
UIFJSHFOFSBMFEVDBUJPOQFFST*OEFFEOFBSMZPGTUVEFOUTXJUI
EJTBCJMJUJFTBSFJOHFOFSBMFEVDBUJPODMBTTSPPNTGPSPSNPSF
of their school day. To effectively implement IDEA in ever more
inclusive environments, funding is needed to improve the process of
DPMMBCPSBUJPOCFUXFFOTQFDJBMBOEHFOFSBMFEVDBUJPO5PTVQQPSUUIJT
environment, IDEA encourages and supports, among other priorities,
comprehensive teacher training, and development of new materials
and resources for teachers and students, including those that employ
universal design for learning elements. These improvements cannot
CFNBEFPSTVTUBJOFEXJUIPVUBNFBOJOHGVMJODSFBTFJOGFEFSBM
funding.
CEC calls on Congress and the President to give IDEA funding the
IJHIQSJPSJUZJUSFRVJSFT"OBQQSPQSJBUJPOPGCJMMJPOGPS':
XPVMESFQSFTFOUBOJNQPSUBOUSFBóSNBUJPOPGUIFGFEFSBM
DPNNJUNFOUUP*%&"$POHSFTTTIPVMEGVMöMMJUTZFBSPMEQSPNJTF
*%&"GVOEJOHTIPVMECFBWBJMBCMFBOENBOEBUPSZ
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':CJMMJPO
t ':'VMMGVOEJOHGPS1BSU#JTSFBDIFE
Broken Promises: Funding Shortfall in Special Education (IDEA Part B)
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$0
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
Authorizaton
Dollars
(in thousands)
14
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$10,579,746
$10,567,961
$10,782,961
$10,947,500
$11,505,211
$11,505,211
$11,466,000
$11,577,900
$12,358,377
$14,648,647
$16,938,918
$19,229,188
$21,519,459
$23,809,729
$26,100,000
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
0
Despite a 37-year commitment made
by Congress to fully fund the Individuals
With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
Grants to States, funding remains
woefully inadequate. In fact, despite
Congress’s 2004 commitment to provide
incremental funding allocations which
would have put IDEA on a “glide path”
towards reaching full funding by
2011, since 2005 Congress has never
appropriated the authorized levels,
resulting in a cumulative shortfall
of over $30 billion. There is no IDEA
authorization amount beyond FY 2011.
PART B STATE AND LOCAL GRANT PROGRAM
PART B OF THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT
FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2011 ALLOCATIONS
Dollars (In Thousands)
Allocations to States and Eligible Jurisdictions
State or Other Area
Alabama
2011 Regular Grant Award
State or Other Area
2011 Regular Grant Award
179,981,063
New Jersey
357,803,082
Alaska
36,063,773
New Mexico
90,213,359
Arizona
183,462,799
New York
751,403,381
Arkansas
111,004,304
North Carolina
323,238,888
California
1,213,998,591
North Dakota
27,294,331
Colorado
152,891,940
Ohio
433,153,992
Connecticut
131,612,076
Oklahoma
146,388,454
Delaware
33,614,205
Oregon
127,639,189
District of Columbia
16,901,322
Pennsylvania
422,715,133
Florida
625,657,364
Rhode Island
43,287,960
Georgia
322,524,945
South Carolina
175,288,806
Hawaii
39,504,872
South Dakota
32,514,649
Idaho
54,740,479
Tennessee
234,411,003
Illinois
501,248,821
Texas
972,140,502
Indiana
255,333,586
Utah
108,500,873
Iowa
120,849,314
Vermont
26,316,947
Kansas
105,763,719
Virginia
279,025,194
Kentucky
156,513,462
Washington
219,029,685
Louisiana
187,317,380
West Virginia
75,177,002
Maine
54,165,727
Wisconsin
206,053,221
Maryland
198,176,263
Wyoming
27,609,085
Massachusetts
280,997,908
American Samoa
Michigan
396,402,364
Guam
Minnesota
187,882,322
Mississippi
118,935,556
Northern Mariana
Islands
Missouri
224,855,045
Montana
36,814,020
Nebraska
73,914,997
Nevada
68,994,755
New Hampshire
46,976,599
Puerto Rico
6,297,058
13,962,402
4,785,135
112,146,753
Virgin Islands
8,874,264
Freely Associated
States
6,579,306
Indian Set-Aside
92,011,750
Undistributed (nonState allocations)
25,000,000
TOTAL
11,465,960,975
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 15
1%$*','
State and Local Grant Program
Success Stories
Kyrell Paige
9-years old
Loudoun County, VA
Kyrell Paige is a 9-year old, 3rd grade
student attending Sugarland Elementary
School in Loudoun County, Virginia.
In kindergarten, Kyrell was referred for special education because
high levels of aggression, tantrum behaviors, poor peer relationships,
and difficulties with oral expression were negatively impacting his
academic and social progress. He was found eligible as a student with
an emotional disability and speech/language impairment and was
placed in a self-contained classroom where he received speech and
language services and school counseling support.
Initially, Kyrell’s social-emotional difficulties made him unavailable
for learning. Through an emphasis on positive social skills and
promoting his self-esteem through school-based counseling support,
Kyrell began to establish appropriate peer relationships and take
more responsibility for his behavior. Strong collaboration between
the home and the school further enhanced his progress. As he
better managed his behavior, he began to make academic progress
commensurate with his ability.
Kyrell is now fully included in a general education 3rd-grade
classroom where he is working at grade level in most subject areas
and continues to receive support from his special education teacher
and speech/language pathologist.
IDEA provides funding for the services required to support Kyrell in
developing the skills required to access and to succeed in the general
education classroom. Kyrell’s success can be attributed to the efforts
of a comprehensive, specialized program that serves students with
emotional disabilities.
Alison Lyons
Behavior Specialist
Angela Robinson
Principal
16
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Kiera Leigh Sanderfer
10-years old
Chandler, AZ
Kiera was referred prior to
kindergarten for developmental
delays (DD). Kiera has thrived over
the past 2 plus years within the
Kyrene District. Her teacher, Mrs. Reyes, has been with her since 3rd
grade. Kiera continues to learn ways to express herself with sign
language and hand gestures.
Due to IDEA, Kiera receives special education, assistive technology, as
well as speech, physical, and occupational therapy services. Her DD
worker and Habilitation/Respite worker enhance Kiera’s daily living
skills. She continues to improve in the classroom due to the supports
in place (IDEA).
Kiera’s current challenges include communication skills by receptively
understanding the meaning of functional picture symbols, expressing
new words, using “I” statements, increased participation in the
classroom, and socially. IDEA allows for Kiera to receive the necessary
services that contribute to her success both academically and socially.
IDEA funding is integral in providing for Kiera’s special education
personnel and comprehensive services. She enjoys a better life
because of funding. Cuts to IDEA will only impede Kiera and other
students. Kiera exemplifies the positive impact of IDEA in the lives of
children with exceptional learning needs. Fully funding of IDEA will
result in greater outcomes for all children.
Michael Sanderfer
Father
PART B STATE AND LOCAL GRANT PROGRAM
Success Stories
Alexander Heller
19-years old
Milford, NJ
Alexander is the quintessential model
student. Many will describe Alex as a
“hero” because of the adversity that he
has dealt with during his lifetime.
Alex is an ex-preemie, 26-week surviving twin. He has been living in
a foster adoptive home since 10 months of age and medical records
indicate that there was probably drug and alcohol abuse in utero
resulting in his global developmental delays and auditory processing
issues. Alex has been diagnosed with multiple disabilities including
Charcot-Marie Tooth (CMT) syndrome, an inherited neurological
disorder.
While at one time Alex received his instruction in a restrictive, contained
classroom environment, he now spends 60% of his day in a general
education setting with paraprofessional assistance and receives speech
and occupational therapies and adaptive physical education classes.
Alex has completed 16 consecutive marking periods as an Honor Roll
student and is passionate about writing. In fact, halfway through his
sophomore year his general education English teacher recommended
his placement in a college-prep level English class. He has also taken
2 years of journalism because of his displayed creative and academic
capability in writing. Alex is a regular contributor to our Annual
Poetry Festival, submitting original work which he freely shares with
the audience. After taking an introductory elective in TV Media, Alex
blossomed into the favorite weatherman and also has a featured
monthly segment called “Did You Know” which he writes, films, and
produces.
We couldn’t be more proud of Alex and will miss him when he
graduates from Delaware Valley.
Julia Lechner
Learning Consultant
Kayleigh Oxandabourne
6-years old
Camden, SC
Kayleigh Oxandaboure is a
kindergartener at Pine Tree
Hill Elementary School in Camden, South Carolina. She has
developmental delays and is fully included in the Kindergarten
classroom.
Kayleigh has benefited from IDEA’s programs since she was a
baby when she received services from an early interventionist,
physical, occupational, and speech therapists. When she was 3,
she transitioned into a public preschool class for students with
developmental delays.
Kayleigh entered school with limited motor control. She could not
take care of her personal needs, relied on others to move her around
the classroom, was pushed in a stroller around the school, required
special equipment to help her sit up in class, and was totally nonverbal. Through it all, Kayleigh entered school with a great family
support system and a personal attitude of “I CAN DO IT MYSELF!”
As a kindergartner, Kayleigh fully participates in all classroom
activities and has a personal assistant, continues to receive OT, PT, and
speech therapies, and utilizes assistive technology to ensure access
to the general education curriculum. She now walks with her class
and has developed friendships that transcend the classroom. This
success is because of collaborative partnerships, insightful planning, a
strong support system, quality early intervention, and a little girl who
always knew she could do it!
Kayleigh exemplifies the positive impact of IDEA in the lives of
children with exceptional learning needs. IDEA has partially funded
Kayleigh’s interventions and services. The money invested in Kayleigh
is now saving much more as she needs fewer adaptive devices and
less support. Most importantly fully funding IDEA will result in better
outcomes for all children, including Kayleigh.
Jennifer Watson
Teacher
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 17
18
| FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2012
1%$*','
Preschool Grants Program Section 619
PART B PRESCHOOL GRANTS PROGRAM SECTION 619
Authorizing Provision
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 619 (20 USC 1419), as amended by the Education of the Handicapped Act
Amendments 1986, P.L. 99-457; by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Amendments Act of 1991, P.L. 102-119; by the Individuals With
Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17; and by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, P.L. 108-446. The
program is authorized at “such sums.”
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
ARRA OF 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
374,099
400,000
374,099
PURPOSE
The Preschool Grants Program (also known as Section 619) is
intended to help states ensure that all preschool-aged children (3-5
years of age) with disabilities receive special education and related
services. In 1986, before this program existed, only half of the states
provided services to preschoolers with disabilities. Since 1987,
however, when this expanded program began operating, the number
of children served has increased from 265,000 to an estimated
735,500 in fiscal year 2013.
WHO RECEIVES FUNDING
State education agencies (SEAs) receive this funding, and through
them, local education agencies (LEAs) and educational service
agencies are eligible for grants under this program.
ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED
Funds are used to provide the full range and variety of appropriate
preschool special education and related services to children with
disabilities 3 through 5 years of age.
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS
Over the last 2 decades, the enrollment of preschool children
with disabilities receiving services provided by IDEA has grown by
approximately 470,000 or over 60%, while federal funding has only
increased by 25%, without taking into account inflation. Over the last
decade alone, funding has decreased by over $15 million. In 1992,
the federal government spent $803 dollars per child; the President’s
FY 2013 budget recommends only spending $507 dollars per child, a
decrease of 37%. Although ARRA infused a substantial and needed
amount into this program, without a sustained commitment to
373,400
372,600
1,102,500
funding, children will fail to receive appropriate services especially in
these difficult economic times. Thus, the reality is that when federal
funding fails to keep pace with program growth, children, families,
schools, and states bear a disproportionate share of the financial
burden.
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
“Part B, Section 619 funding to states has remained constant for more
than a decade. Unfortunately, the costs of supporting early childhood
special education services to children at the state and local school district
level have risen dramatically.
Rising salaries, significant increases in utility and transportation costs,
ever increasing demands for data from the Office of Special Education
Programs (OSEP), and the rising cost of materials and supplies to support
quality instruction have resulted in a substantial financial burden.
States and districts have had to bear the brunt of these increases in
costs while seeing no increase in the federal share. In many cases, local
education agencies have taken the hardest hit. The impact has resulted
in increases in costs to states and local districts to continue to support
federally mandated services. In many situations ongoing state and district
services have had to be cutback or local taxes raised in order for these
systems to continue to comply with federal regulations and mandates
around IDEA so far without commensurate increases in federal support.”
Jim J. Lesko
Director, Early Development and Learning Resources
Delaware Department of Education
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 19
1%$*','
Preschool Grants Program Section 619
CEC RECOMMENDS
__________________________________________
CEC urges Congress to reverse course and follow the advice of our
nation’s leading researchers and practitioners by making a substantial
investment in preschool children with disabilities. A federal
investment of $1.1 billion is critical to the success of this program and
the children, families, and communities it serves.
Over the last 2 decades, the enrollment of preschool children with
disabilities receiving services provided by IDEA has grown by over
470,000 or over 60%, while federal funding has only increased by
XJUIPVUUBLJOHJOUPBDDPVOUJOGMBUJPO
__________________________________________
Decreasing Commitment:
Decline in IDEA Preschool Funding
$ 400,000
$ 380,000
$ 370,000
$ 360,000
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$ 384,597
$ 380,751
$ 380,751
$ 374,100
$ 374,099
$ 374,099
$ 373,400
$ 372,600
Decreasing Commitment:
Decline in IDEA Preschool Dollars Per Child Allocation
$ 1,000
$ 500
$0
Dollars Per Child
20
1987
1992
1997
2007
2011
2012
$ 679
$ 803
$ 641
$ 534
$ 527
$ 507
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
PART B PRESCHOOL GRANTS PROGRAM SECTION 619
4FDUJPO1SFTDIPPM1SPHSBN
'FEFSBM"QQSPQSJBUJPOTBOE/BUJPOBM$IJME$PVOU
updated February 16, 2012
FFY
‘77 ‘86 ‘87 ‘88 ‘89 ‘90 ‘91 ‘92 ‘93 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 ‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12
Dollars
(millions)
12
28 180 201 247 251 292 320 326 339 360 360 360 374 374 390 390 390 387 388 385 381 381 374 374 374 373 373
Children
197 261 265 288 323 352 369 398 430 479 528 549 562 572 574 589 601 620 648 681 703 706 712 710 709 735 N/A N/A
(thousands)
Dollars
per Child
63 110 679 697 769 713 797 803 750 707 683 656 641 654 653 664 650 630 599 570 548 540 535 527 528 509 N/A N/A
1000
Children (Thousands)
Dollars (Millions)
Dollars per Child
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
‘77
‘86
‘87
‘88
‘89
‘90
‘91
‘92
‘93
‘94
‘95
‘96
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
‘11
‘12
GRAPH KEY
Dollars (millions) appropriated for distribution to states
Source: IUUQXXXFEHPWBCPVUPWFSWJFXCVEHFUCVEHFUBDUJPOQEG%PXOMPBEFE'FCSVBSZ
Children (thousands) receiving FAPE in the fall of each federal fiscal year, U.S. & Outlying Areas
4PVSDFIUUQTXXXJEFBEBUBPSH1BSU#$IJME$PVOUBTQ%PXOMPBEFE'FCSVBSZ
/PUF"TPGUIJTVQEBUF$IJME$PVOUEBUBGPS'BMMBSFOPUBWBJMBCMF
Dollars per Child allocation of Section 619 dollars
FFY (Federal Fiscal Year): For example, in FFY 1986, 261,000 children were reported to be receiving services as of December 1, 1985.
Compiled by Lazara, A. & Danaher, J. & Goode, S. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center.
This document is maintained online at http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/growthcomp.pdf
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 21
1%$*','
Preschool Grants Program Section 619
PART B PRESCHOOL GRANTS PROGRAM UNDER SECTION 619
OF THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT
Dollars (In Thousands)
Federal Fiscal Year 2011 Allocations
Preschool Grants Allocations to States and Eligible Jurisdictions
State or Other Area
2011 Regular Grant Award
2011 Regular Grant Award
Alabama
5,495,480
Nebraska
2,216,070
Alaska
1,239,512
Nevada
2,200,299
Arizona
5,246,435
New Hampshire
1,530,429
Arkansas
5,269,918
New Jersey
11,177,681
California
37,746,603
New Mexico
3,131,729
Colorado
4,861,610
New York
33,156,784
Connecticut
4,818,610
North Carolina
11,113,496
Delaware
1,233,036
North Dakota
District of Columbia
239,418
Florida
18,135,111
Georgia
9,616,887
Hawaii
22
State or Other Area
Ohio
792,151
12,295,481
Oklahoma
3,571,920
Oregon
3,786,322
975,921
Pennsylvania
13,723,720
Idaho
2,148,215
Rhode Island
1,642,085
Illinois
17,337,847
South Carolina
7,014,967
Indiana
8,741,965
South Dakota
1,439,498
Iowa
3,921,348
Tennessee
6,762,357
Kansas
4,257,655
Texas
22,380,344
Kentucky
10,033,703
Utah
3,497,488
Louisiana
6,360,712
Vermont
842,648
Maine
2,469,146
Virginia
8,967,283
Maryland
6,553,868
Washington
8,025,225
Massachusetts
9,718,123
West Virginia
3,422,571
Michigan
12,332,211
Wisconsin
9,305,597
Minnesota
7,297,787
Wyoming
1,035,572
Mississippi
4,152,914
Puerto Rico
3,067,229
Missouri
5,887,301
Montana
1,160,520
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
TOTAL
373,350,802
PART B PRESCHOOL GRANTS PROGRAM SECTION 619
Success Stories
K’Mara Barr
3-years old
Goose Creek, SC
Justice Coleman
6-years old
Loudoun County, VA
Justice Coleman is a 6-year old
student in the Inclusive Placement
Opportunities for Preschoolers
(IPOP) classroom at Kenneth Culbert
Elementary School in Loudoun County, Virginia. IPOP is a preschool
program that fosters appropriate communication, social, motor, and
cognitive skills in an inclusive setting, serving students with delays or
special needs alongside students who are typically developing.
K’Mara Barr is a 3-year old girl who
has been diagnosed with autism
spectrum disorder. She is currently
enrolled in a self-contained preschool
classroom at Westview Primary School.
This year, Justice’s classroom has an equal numbers of children with
and without disabilities which promotes positive social interactions.
Justice has worked to make her vision more functional, fully utilize
her assistive technology, and spontaneously greet her friends.
Physically she is working to activate the promethean board with
switches, engage in vocalizations, and develop controlled use of her
fingers, hands, and arm for ball throwing, coloring, painting, and
music activities.
K’Mara is now able to use words to label objects and to express
herself. Her cognitive, adaptive and socialization skills have
significantly improved since beginning special education and early
intervention services funded through IDEA. In less than a year, K’Mara
is able to name her colors, the children in her classroom, and knows
her numbers and alphabet. The school is providing her with Applied
Behavioral Analysis (ABA), and speech and occupational therapies.
K’Mara receives early intervention from Berkeley Citizens, Inc.
through the South Carolina Department of Disabilities and Special
Needs. When she was 2 ½, K’Mara began receiving weekly special
Justice is a student with significant developmental delays including
instruction, speech and occupational therapies from BabyNet to
cerebral palsy, laryngeal malacia, tracheal malacia, vision and
address her cognitive, language, adaptive, social, emotional delays,
hearing impairments, and agenesis of the corpus callosum. She began and her sensory processing disorder. With this assistance, K’Mara was
receiving services shortly after birth through Early Intervention (EI)
able to transition in just a few months from BabyNet to preschool
and received physical, occupational, and vision therapies.
where she continues to receive services.
IDEA has provided part of the funding, supports, and services Justice
benefits from which form the foundation of her education and have
allowed Justice to gain access to typically developing peers. Being in
an inclusion setting with typically developing peers has been highly
motivating and encouraged her to maximize her skills.
Cara Coleman
Mother
Colleen Whalen Johnson
Special Education Supervisor
Because of IDEA, K’Mara is making great strides in her overall
development and is expected to be included in a general education
classroom by age 5. K’Mara has progressed from being nonverbal and
withdrawn to blowing her bus driver a kiss while telling her “See you
later!”
Increasing IDEA funding will have only positive effects in the lives
of many children like K’Mara and her family. Without the necessary
special attention early in her life, K’Mara would not have the potential
to succeed that she has now.
Tamiesha McKelvey
Early Interventionist
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 23
1%$*','
Preschool Grants Program Section 619
Success Stories
Dawson Scoggins
6-years old
Cleveland, TN
Dawson was born with premature
lungs and feeding issues that required
him to be hospitalized for more than a
month after birth. At 2-years old, there
was an obvious change as he began to regress developmentally. He
lost some language skills, did not make eye contact with his family, and
exhibited great anxiety, particularly about changes in routines. This soon
led to an autism diagnosis at age 2 and a half.
About a year ago, Dawson’s family transitioned him to public school with
some special education support. Today, Dawson works independently
and the special education teacher spends much of her time simply
observing his interaction with peers in his kindergarten class at Hopewell
Elementary. At the end of each day, she reviews new concepts and talks
with Dawson about what he is learning. He also continues to receive
speech and occupational therapy.
Dawson no longer displays jittery behavior or a need for a rigid schedule;
he blends in well among his classmates. These changes have amazed his
teachers, peers, and parents
Kimberly Jones, his kindergarten teachers, says, “It has been an honor
to work with Dawson and his family this school year. He is a very social
young man with exceptional behavior. I have confidence he will conquer
any challenges he faces.”
“When we received the diagnosis of autism, we wondered what the
future would hold,” say his parent,s Dewayne and Teresa Scoggins.
“Although there are still challenges that await him, Dawson has shown
with his hard work that his future can be bright. It is truly amazing what
he has accomplished.”
Thanks to the speech and occupational therapy services he has received
funded by IDEA, Dawson’s excellent progress is readily apparent.
Federal funding must be increased so he can continue to build upon his
achievements.
Kathiann Montgomery
Special Education Coordinator
24
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Aizaliz Reyes
5-years old
Reading, Pennsylvania
Aizaliz Reyes is 5-years old and
receives services through the Berks
County Intermediate Unit Early
Intervention program in Reading,
Pennsylvania, to address her delayed language skills.
Aizaliz was referred for services in the spring of 2006. Since then,
she has received speech therapy and occupational therapy to address
concerns with preacademic skills, play skills, social interactions,
expressive language, receptive language, fine motor skills, and
sensory processing issues.
Aizaliz has difficulty with both her receptive and expressive language
skills. Though she was verbal upon entering the program, she was not
able to express her basic wants and needs. She did not consistently
address a communicative partner and her eye contact was limited.
Aizaliz actively avoided her peers and was resistant to joining a group
for instructional time. She was also exhibiting some mild sensory
processing issues and fine motor delays.
In the 7 months since her early intervention services were
implemented, Aizaliz has increased her language skills dramatically.
She can speak in sentences and follow spoken directions more quickly
than before. She can now call all her classmates by name and will
play with them. Her preacademic skills, her fine motor skills, and
her ability to process sensory input have all increased. Her family is
constantly amazed at what she can communicate and understand.
Melissa, Aizaliz’s mother, has shared with us her gratitude for all
the skills Aizaliz has gained since she enrolled her in our classroom.
Aizaliz is truly a success story! She has obviously benefited from the
program and definitely enjoys coming to school! Early intervention
programs are critical for preschoolers like Aizaliz, to receive the skills
needed to allow them to be successful, lifelong learners.
Marcia Albitz, Teacher
Robyn Zikmund, Speech Therapist
Mary Ryan, Occupational Therapist
Sherry Evans, Paraprofessional
1%$*'-'
Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities Program
PART C INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
Authorizing Provision
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part H, Section 671, as authorized by the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of
1986, P.L. 99-457; as amended by the IDEA Amendments of 1991, P.L. 102-119; by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of
1997, P.L. 105-17; and by the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, P.L. 108-446. The program is authorized at “such sums.”
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
ARRA OF 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
439,427
500,000
439,427
438,500
442,700
984,427
PURPOSE
ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED
Part C of the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act provides
grants to states to develop and implement a statewide,
comprehensive, coordinated, multidisciplinary, interagency system
that provides early intervention services for infants and toddlers with
disabilities, ages birth through 2 years, and their families.
Federal funds under this program are used for the planning,
development, and implementation of a statewide system for the
provision of early intervention services. Funds may also be used
for the general expansion and improvement of early intervention
services.
WHO RECEIVES FUNDING
Infants and toddlers are eligible for this program if they have a
developmental delay or a diagnosed condition with a high probability
of resulting in developmental delay. At state discretion, children who
are at risk for developmental delay may also be included in the target
population for the program.
All states participate voluntarily. Funds under this authority are
received and administered by a lead agency appointed by the
governor of the state, with the participation of a state interagency
coordinating council also appointed by the governor. According to
the U.S. Department of Education, approximately 370,000 children
received services through the IDEA Part C Infants and Toddlers With
Disabilities Program.
Early intervention services for each eligible child, include:
1. A multidisciplinary evaluation and assessment, and
2. A written individualized family services plan (IFSP) developed
by a multidisciplinary team which includes the parents. Services
are available to each child and his or her family as stated in the
IFSP. Teams must design and provide service coordination and the
services based on individual developmental needs.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 27
1%$*'-'
Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities Program
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS
Federal funding for this program has declined in the last decade,
despite widely accepted recognition of the importance of investing
in high quality early intervention programs. Over the last decade,
20% of states have narrowed their eligibility criteria and states are
increasingly enacting systems that change services for families.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act provided an historic
infusion of funding for Part C by doubling the program’s appropriation
for FY2009. Unfortunately, with the expiration of ARRA funds, Part C
programs are struggling to provide services and supports to children
and families.
States and communities struggle to appropriately address the needs
of young children with disabilities and these services are especially
vulnerable in this economy. The President’s FY 2013 budget proposal
recognizes the critical role of early intervention on young children
by recommending a $50 million increase in Part C. However, despite
the general consensus among the research community that early
intervention is a wise investment, budgets passed by Congress
have virtually ignored this population. By failing to increase federal
funding for children with disabilities ages birth through 2, Congress
continues a decades-old policy that squeezes states and hinders their
ability to provide the services these children and families need.
28
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
“Federal grant funding under IDEA makes up less than 3% of the
more than $700 million that currently finances New York’s program
for infants and toddlers with disabilities.
New York has maintained a strong financial commitment to early
intervention, despite stagnant federal appropriations, a funding
allocation formula that is unfair to New Yorkers, the Child Abuse
Prevention and Treatment Act’s unfunded mandate for expansion,
and a nearly unprecedented financial crisis faced by state and local
governments nationwide.
I strongly urge the Congress to uphold its commitment to partner
with states and communities to ensure these vital services provided
under IDEA are fully funded.”
Richard F. Daines, M.D.
Commissioner of Health, State of New York
PART C INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
CEC RECOMMENDS
CEC urges Congress to strengthen its partnership with states by
investing $984.4 million in the Early Intervention Program for FY
2013. This increase will assist states in planning, developing, and
implementing statewide Early Intervention systems. A substantial
federal commitment will help ensure that infants and toddlers and their
families receive the services they need and deserve.
Research has confirmed the vital role of intervening early to address the
individual developmental needs of infants and toddlers with disabilities
and their families. Addressing the needs of a child in the early years lays
a foundation for future social and cognitive development.
As a result of diminishing federal funds, over the last decade, 20% of
states have narrowed their eligibility criteria and 75% have enacted
systems that charge families for services despite evidence that a dollar
spent in the early years can save hundreds, if not thousands, later.
Unfortunately, although Congress affirmed this belief in IDEA 2004,
and as enrollment in the program has steadily increased over the last
decade, the federal investment in Early Intervention has decreased.
States and communities continue to demonstrate their commitment
to this effort by investing significant resources of their own, but an
increased federal presence is essential to ensuring all children are
served.
Stagnant Investment:
Too Few Resources Dedicated to Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities
$ 445,000
$ 440,000
$ 435,000
$ 430,000
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$ 440,808
$ 436,400
$ 436,400
$ 435,700
$ 439,427
$ 439,427
$ 438,500
$ 442,700
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 29
1%$*'-'
Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities Program
1BSU$*OGBOUTBOE5PEEMFST8JUI%JTBCJMJUJFT1SPHSBN
'FEFSBM"QQSPQSJBUJPOTBOE/BUJPOBM$IJME$PVOU
updated February 16, 2012
FFY
‘87
‘88
‘89
‘90
‘91
Dollars
(millions)
50
67
69
79
117 175 213 253 316 316 316 350 370 375 384 417 434 444 441 436 436 436 439 439 439 443
Children
(thousands)
N/A N/A N/A N/A 194 167 143 154 165 178 187 197 187 206 233 246 269 275 285 299 305 322 343 349 343 N/A
Dollars
per Child
N/A N/A N/A N/A 603 1048 1490 1643 1915 1775 1690 1777 1979 1820 1648 1697 1615 1616 1550 1458 1428 1354 1280 1259 1279 N/A
‘92
‘93
‘94
‘95
‘96
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
‘11
‘12
2,500
Dollars per Child
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
500
Dollars (Millions)
400
Children (Thousands)
300
200
100
0
‘87
‘88
‘89
‘90
‘91
‘92
‘93
‘94
‘95
‘96
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
‘11
GRAPH KEY
Dollars (millions) appropriated for distribution to states
4PVSDFT'':IUUQXXXFEHPWBCPVUPWFSWJFXCVEHFUCVEHFUBDUJPOQEG
'':IUUQXXXFEHPWBCPVUPWFSWJFXCVEHFUCVEHFUBDUJPOQEG%PXOMPBEFE'FCSVBSZ
Children (thousands) with Individualized Family Service Plans (IFSPs) in the fall of each federal fiscal year, U.S. & Outlying Areas. Source: FFY 1991-1998:
http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/pubs/partcupdate2010.pdf
FFY 1998-2001: https://www.ideadata.org/TABLES31ST/AR_8-4.htm
FFY 2002-2011: https://www.ideadata.org/TABLES34TH/AR_8-4.xls (Downloaded February 16, 2012)|
Notes: A single-day child count is used, which may underrepresent the actual number of children served that year. As of this update, Child Count data for Fall 2011 are
not available.
Dollars per Child allocation of Part C dollars
FFY (Federal Fiscal Year): For example, in FFY 1991, 194,000 children were reported to be receiving services as of December 1, 1990.
Compiled by Lazara, A. & Danaher, J., & Goode, S. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center.
This document is maintained online at http://www.nectac.org/~pdfs/growthcomppartc.pdf
30
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
‘12
PART C INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
PART C OF THE INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES EDUCATION ACT
FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR 2011 ALLOCATIONS
Dollars (In Thousands)
Part C Allocations to State Lead Agencies and Eligible Jurisdictions
State or Other Area
2011 Regular Grant Award
State or Other Area
2011 Regular Grant Award
Alabama
6,107,122
New Jersey
10,720,012
Alaska
2,150,225
New Mexico
2,950,479
Arizona
9,991,120
New York
23,867,174
Arkansas
3,970,368
North Carolina
12,890,890
California
53,574,884
North Dakota
2,153,794
Colorado
7,030,214
Ohio
Connecticut
4,018,052
Oklahoma
Delaware
2,150,225
Oregon
District of Columbia
2,156,043
Pennsylvania
14,395,986
Florida
22,547,415
Rhode Island
2,151,325
Georgia
14,489,756
South Carolina
6,040,889
Hawaii
2,150,294
South Dakota
2,151,959
Idaho
2,440,740
Tennessee
8,298,468
Illinois
17,318,213
Texas
39,962,532
Indiana
8,608,058
Utah
5,378,700
Iowa
3,960,706
Vermont
2,152,548
Kansas
4,019,084
Virginia
10,343,853
Kentucky
5,567,642
Washington
8,755,006
Louisiana
6,403,256
West Virginia
2,151,649
Maine
2,151,692
Wisconsin
7,065,124
Maryland
7,400,012
Wyoming
2,150,225
Massachusetts
7,445,026
American Samoa
Michigan
11,852,205
Minnesota
7,069,831
Mississippi
4,372,987
Missouri
7,839,433
Montana
2,150,355
Nebraska
2,636,845
Nevada
3,937,463
New Hampshire
2,152,709
Guam
Northern Mariana
Islands
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Freely Associated States
Indian set-aside
State Incentive Grants
TOTAL
14,296,808
5,301,454
4,820,133
582,117
1,424,395
446,581
4,383,906
759,289
5,290,875
438,548,146
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 31
1%$*'-'
Infants and Toddlers With Disabilities Program
Success Stories
Sean Acker
19-months old
Conneaut Lake, PA
Nineteen-month-old Sean Acker
is enrolled in the Barber National
Institute Bright Beginning
Early Intervention program in
Northwestern Pennsylvania. Sean is
diagnosed with Congenital Fiber-Type Disproportion Myopathy, which
is characterized by decreased muscle tone and generalized muscle
weakness. Respiratory involvement, contractures, spinal deformities,
and feeding difficulties are common in this disorder.
Sean was referred for Early Intervention when he was just 2
months old. At that time, he was unable to hold his head up in any
position. The family was having difficulty feeding him and they were
concerned that he might choke and get formula into his lungs. His
weight gain was slow. Sean began receiving physical therapy to
improve his overall strength and help him gain control of his head.
Because of continuing concerns about feeding and weight gain, Sean
had a feeding tube inserted. After that, occupational therapy service
was added to help increase the amount of thickened food in Sean’s
diet so that he didn’t have to rely on the tube feeding to get all of his
calories. Sean receives services in his home with one or both of his
parents present.
Elizabeth Romanick
12-years old
Bismark, ND
Elizabeth has Down syndrome and
has reaped the benefits of accessing
early intervention and special
education services from birth.
Throughout her schooling, she has
learned alongside of her typically developing peers, having attended
a typical preschool and now spending at least 80% of her day with
her nondisabled peers.
Elizabeth had the benefits of an early start made possible by IDEA
Part C. Even with many health complications in her first year, she
was constantly challenged. We were introduced to sign language
when she was less than a year old and she had over 150 signs at age
3. Today she continues to be an amazing communicator. Elizabeth
is highly independent, able to use many social skills and decision
making skills in her daily life. She feels very confident about herself,
a huge achievement!
Today, Elizabeth uses assistive technology to assist in making
reading, writing, and test completion accessible and benefits from
the assistance of an occupational therapist, specialists in intellectual
disabilities, and speech and language therapists who co-teach
certain parts of the reading and language curriculum each day in her
Since beginning therapy, Sean is now growing steadily and getting
classroom. She receives some small group and individual instruction
stronger. Like other toddlers his age, he is able to walk independently to work on reading, writing, and math skills.
in the house and enjoys riding his ride-on toy. He continues to receive
physical therapy to help him gain more strength and skills so that he Many states are making hard decisions about cuts to Part C. Part
C services set the foundation for who Elizabeth is today and also
will be able to play in the yard with his brothers.
impacted our confidence as parents to support her and participate
Continued funding for Early Intervention programs will give children
in planning for her education. We have to work to assure that Part
like Sean the help they need to achieve the best possible outcomes as C continues to stay funded and work towards a guarantee for all
they continue to grow.
children.
Kathy Schreckengost
Physical Therapist
32
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Roxane Romanick
Mother
PART C INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES PROGRAM
Success Stories
Jaden Allen
2-years old
Joliet, Illinois
Kian Tan
7-years old
River Forest, IL
Kian Tan is a second grader at Keystone
Montessori in a general education
classroom. He was born with PraderWilli syndrome (PWS), which put him
at risk for autism, obesity, and mental retardation.
Kian was born following a normal pregnancy and delivery. Within hours
of birth he was in intensive care because he could not eat, cry, or move.
His blood sugar dropped rapidly and his prognosis was grim. Two and
a half weeks later he was released from intensive care with a diagnosis
of PWS, a feeding tube, and a referral to early intervention for speech,
occupational, and physical therapies.
Because of early intervention and the therapies Kian received, he is a
well developed little boy. These services and supports have resulted in
numerous positive developmental, academic, and social outcomes. Kian
is able to process sensory information, have legible handwriting, pay
attention in class, and run and play with his friends at the playground.
Due to early intervention, Kian has met most of his developmental
milestones and no longer receives occupational or physical therapies.
If I set aside my love for my son and my belief in caring for children and
investing in their future, I am left with the fact that investing in early
intervention for Kian made smart financial sense. The state paid for three
weekly therapy sessions for 3 years and, in return, the state appears to
have saved a lifetime of special education and disability services. Early
intervention is not just a compassionate program to fund, it is a smart
program to fund.
Lara Pullen
Mother
Jaden Allen is 27-months old and
lives with his family in Joliet, Illinois.
Jaden receives Early Intervention
services through BDI Playhouse
to help his family address their
concerns related to Jaden’s diagnosis
of Down syndrome. He has been receiving services that have
changed over time to meet the needs of both Jaden and his
family. Jaden currently receives developmental therapy, physical
therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy. He will also
begin attending a developmental play group that focuses on
helping Jaden use a combination of sign language and words to
communicate his needs and interact with children.
Jaden has made great strides with his gross motor development
and is able to safely explore and play at home but is still working
on walking up and down the stairs. Recently, Jaden has begun to
imitate simple functional signs to let his mom and others know
when he wants to play, eat, and when he is finished with an activity.
He is also using more signs and some single words to communicate
and interact with his family and Early Intervention providers. These
newly developing communication skills are an exciting area of
progress for Jaden and his family. Having services in their home
provided by caring professionals has given the Allen family the
strategies and support to help Jaden make steady progress in all
areas of his development.
IDEA provides the funding that allows the state of Illinois to offer
Early Intervention services to eligible children ages birth to 3 and
their families. State funds make up for the shortfall of federal
funds. If Early Intervention funding was not available, Jaden and
his family would not have received the help they needed to address
the developmental challenges presented by his diagnosis of Down
syndrome.
Amy Cocorikis
Developmental Therapist
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 33
34
| FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2012
1%$*'#'
Support Programs
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
252,845
260,203
240,700
The IDEA Part D Support Programs provide the critical infrastructure,
training, research, and development functions necessary to drive
improvements in all aspects of special education practice. The Support
Programs provide critical funds for professional development, technical
assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about promising practices
to improve results for children with disabilities.
CEC believes that the Part D Support Programs should receive a total
annual appropriation based upon a percentage of the overall federal
annual appropriation for the IDEA Part B Grants to States, Section
619, and Part C Programs. In making its Part D support programs
appropriations recommendations, CEC uses the private industry
standard for research and development (R&D), typically 10% of the
overall operating budget. However, CEC has adopted a conservative
funding formula index of 7.5% for infrastructure and R&D activities for
the purpose of calculating the recommended total figure for the Part
D Support Programs. The distribution is calculated by programs within
Part D based upon the relative allocation to each support program
under the Administration’s FY 2013 budget request.
CEC is calling upon Congress to achieve full funding for IDEA within
9 years. Accordingly, we recommend an FY 2013 Part B Grants to
States program appropriation of $13.6 billion, $1.1 billion for the Part
B Section 619 Preschool Program, and $984.4 million for the Part C
Infants and Toddlers Program, for a total annual appropriation for the
IDEA state grants programs of $15.7 billion. Based upon the rationale
described for calculating total annual Part D appropriations detailed
above, CEC recommends a total of $979.3 million for FY 2013 for Part D.
237,500
979,264
OVERVIEW
The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 2004,
reorganized the support programs within Part D, National Activities to
Improve Education of Children With Disabilities into the following four
authorized line items:
„
„
State Personnel Development Grants
Personnel Preparation, Technical Assistance, Model Demonstration
Projects, and Dissemination of Information
„
Supports to Improve Results for Children With Disabilities
„
General Provisions
The IDEA Part D support programs provide the critical infrastructure,
training, research, and development functions necessary to drive
improvements in all aspects of special education practice. The support
programs provide critical funds for professional development, technical
assistance, and dissemination of knowledge about promising practices to
improve results for children with disabilities.
Although these programs serve a critical function in the delivery of special
education services, the total investment is a paltry 2% of the entire IDEA
federal funding budget, whereas the industry standard for research and
development (R&D) is typically 10%. CEC believes that funding for Part
D programs must follow the same investment model as these programs
undergird the effective implementation of all IDEA programs.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 35
1%$*'#'
Support Programs
SUBPART 1
STATE PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT GRANTS
SUBPART 2
PERSONNEL PREPARATION, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, MODEL DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS,
AND DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION
SUBPART 3
36
Sec. 662:
Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities
Sec. 663:
Technical Assistance, Demonstration Projects, Dissemination of Information, and Implementation
of Scientifically Based Research
SUPPORTS TO IMPROVE RESULTS FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES
Sec. 671:
Parent Training and Information Centers
Sec. 672:
Community Parent Resource Centers
Sec. 673:
Technical Assistance for Parent Training and Information Centers
Sec. 674:
Technology Development, Demonstration, and Utilization; and Media Services
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
“Utah has been able to implement vital programs to improve
educational outcomes for students with disabilities because of
funding provided by IDEA Part D such as recruiting and retaining
highly qualified educators in hard to staff schools. Professional
development is provided with a focus on improving the knowledge
and skills of school personnel to deliver scientifically based
instruction.
*%&"1BSU%4VQQPSU1SPHSBNTQSPWJEFUIFDSJUJDBMJOGSBTUSVDUVSF
training, research, and development functions necessary to drive
improvements in all aspects of special education practice.
This funding has very real implications for students and school
personnel, because Utah—like many states—is facing a
financial shortfall in its education budget. Additional funding is
needed to build, support, and implement these programs that
provide information critical to improving results for students with
disabilities no matter where they attend school.”
Bruce Schroeder
Utah Personnel Development Center
Utah State Office of Education
2011
Support Programs for Special Education Lack Funding Support
$ 400,000
$ 300,000
$ 200,000
$ 100,000
$0
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$ 341,559
$ 252,901
$ 202,755
$ 224,600
$ 252,845
$ 260,203
$ 240,700
$ 237,500
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 37
1%$*'#'
Support Programs
Breakout for Part D
FY2013 From IDEA
Part B Grants to States,
Part B Sec. 619, Part C
98%
2%
Part D
Breakout for IDEA Part D
FY2013 Support Programs
Personnel
Preparation
Parent Training and
Information Centers
and Community Parent
Resource Centers
10%
State Personnel
Development
Technology Development
and Media Services
16%
10%
31%
17%
Research in Special Education
(IES Appropriation)
16%
Technical Assistance,
Demonstration,
Dissemination and
Implementation of Research
All figures have
been rounded.
38
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
/),1%$*'78'/"-9':;7<:;;
State Personnel Development Grants
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Authorizing Provision
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subpart “such sums” as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
48,000
48,000
46,800
43,900
188,774
PURPOSE
CEC RECOMMENDS
The purpose of this subpart is to assist SEAs in reforming and
improving their systems for personnel preparation and professional
development in early intervention, educational, and transition
services to improve results for children with disabilities.
CEC recommends an appropriation of $188.7 million for the State
Personnel Development Grants for FY 2013. CEC believes this
is a necessary amount to allow the comprehensive planning,
collaboration, and systemic change required of participating states.
This amount will also ensure that the program continues to expand to
all states and jurisdictions.
CEC believes teachers need to receive high-quality professional
development to effectively lead and teach their students.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 39
/),1%$*'78'/"-9':;7<:;;
State Personnel Development Grants
MINNESOTA STATE PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT GRANT
Unique features of Minnesota’s 2010-2015 State Personnel
Development Grant (SPDG):
Focusing on the disparities within special education for students
with high risk markers of poverty, English language learners and/or
minority status.
Minneapolis and St. Paul have agreed to partner together to:
„
create and share personnel development and materials;
„
provide professional development to staff cohorts across districts;
„
share data utilization strategies and systems;
„
SPDG is braided within existing Minnesota Department of
Education initiatives in order to coordinate and leverage Minnesota
Department of Education and district resources to bring about
change.
„
„
„
partner with faculty from at least 1 IHE to create and deliver
professional development in: data-based decision making;
evidence-based practices, and response to intervention; and
engage schools with confirmed building-level administrative and
staff support to be active leaders.
Sharing of resources and expertise via technology through crossdistrict and cross-initiative collaboration.
Partners: Minneapolis and St. Paul in Years 1-3 and other districts
statewide in Years 4-5, 1 IHE per district, PACER, CAST
Using a differentiated model of staff development in order to meet
individual needs.
PACER—Increase effective parent involvement, targeting parents
of students with disabilities from minority, low income, and English
language learner backgrounds. Develop and provide staff and parent
training and resources for serving students and their families with
high-risk markers. Partners: cohort districts
„
„
Utilizing strategies that recognize strengths and expertise
of district staff with the understanding that the most effective
personnel development comes from within or in collaboration with
Minnesota Department of Education, Institutions of Higher Education
(IHE), and/or national experts/centers.
„
Goal 1: Improve Educational Results for Children and Youth With
Disabilities From Diverse Communities Through the Delivery of
Effective High Quality Instruction
Cohort Districts—Focus on literacy and behavior. Years 1-3 the focus
will be on identified elementary schools in Minneapolis and St. Paul
with concentrations of students in special education who have the
following high risk markers: poverty, minority and/or non-English
speaking who demonstrate a significant achievement gap with their
peers in special education. Significant collaboration and sharing of
resources and professional development across districts including
the common principles of effective practice implementation (CPEP)
model. Training on and implementation of universal design for
learning practices will be embedded.
40
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Part C Autism Spectrum Disorders Initiative—Increase the
capacity of Part C early childhood special educators and other
professionals who serve them to enhance the skills of parents of
young children identified with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) or
related developmental disabilities. Three models of intervention will
be selected and each will be piloted in a district. Partners: Autism
Project Leadership Team, 3 districts serving as pilot/demonstration
sites
Goal 2: Ensure the Recruitment, Hiring, and Retention of a Diverse
Highly Qualified Special Education Workforce
Tribal Cohort—Continue with emotional and behavioral disorders
and learning disabilities licensure training program that is embedded
within American Indian culture and teachings. Implement a
mentoring program to support newly licensed teachers upon
completion of the program.
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Somali Cohort—Explore possibility of developing a Somali cohort
licensure training program with IHE members of the Higher
Education forum.
Interpreter Training—Professional development in education/
special education for those who serve as interpreters and translators
in public schools throughout the state, focusing on the targeted
populations (Spanish, Hmong, Somali).
Severe Needs Literacy—Identify and implement evidence-based
literacy practices targeted to improve literacy skills for children with
significant disabilities.
Higher Education Forum—Collaborate with institutes of higher
education to respond to Board of Teaching newly identified licensure
areas, including new standards within Special Education Core Skills
and existing licensure areas.
www.signetwork.org
CEC believes teachers need to receive
high-quality professional development
to effectively lead and
teach their students.
WYOMING STATE PERSONNEL DEVELOPMENT GRANT
Purpose
The Wyoming State Personnel Development Grant is intended to
improve academic and functional outcomes for all students through
the application, monitoring, and evaluation of practices and processes
linked to the response to intervention (RTI) and positive behavioral
interventions and supports (PBIS) initiatives.
Method
The project proposes to implement RTI and PBIS statewide, across all
grade levels (preschool through high school), and in an integrated
manner that promotes systemic school reform aligned with the State
Performance Plan and other state activities. The project will build
upon and expand existing professional relationships, networks,
and linkages that will allow the state to build and sustain local
capacity. Further, the project will have an integral relationship
with the University of Wyoming to increase the number of highly
qualified special education teachers in Wyoming who have in-depth
knowledge of the RTI and PBIS approaches.
Products
The project is designed to achieve seven major outcomes: (1) increase
in RTI and PBIS-related knowledge and skills among pre-K-12
teachers and preservice teachers; (2) provide appropriate and timely
instructional and behavioral services to students; (3) increase in the
timeliness and accuracy of the identification process; (4) increase in
the academic performance of students with disabilities; (5) decrease
in antisocial and disruptive behaviors by students with disabilities; (6)
increase in the number of special education teachers in Wyoming; and
(7) increase in family knowledge of and involvement in RTI and PBIS
processes.
Duration of grant: 2006-2011
www.signetwork.org
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 41
42
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
!"#$%&'()*(!+,-(..)
Personnel Preparation
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities
Authorizing Provision
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section “such sums” as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION
90,653
90,653
88,500
88,300
FY 2013 CEC
RECOMMENDED
365,748
PURPOSE
CEC RECOMMENDS
The purpose of this program is to (a) help address state-identified
needs for qualified personnel in special education, related services,
early intervention, and general education to work with children
with disabilities; and (b) ensure that those personnel have the skills
and knowledge, derived from practices that have been determined
through research and experience to be successful, that are needed to
serve those children.
CEC recommends an appropriation of $365.7million in FY 2013. This
figure will allow continued funding of innovative, state-of-the-art,
professional development programs that have a strong link to the
research base for teaching and teacher preparation and that promote
putting research into practice in the classroom. This program is
responsible for providing essential groundwork in professional
preparation that states depend on to ensure the success of the
systems change and professional development activities authorized
in the State Personnel Development Grants.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 43
!"#$%&'()*(!+,-(..)
Personnel Preparation
NATIONAL CENTER TO INFORM POLICY AND
PRACTICE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
The National Center to Inform Policy and Practice (NCIPP) in Special
Education aims to inform special education policy and practice by
examining and recommending policies and practices that improve the
retention and quality of beginning special education teachers.
1)"4&***OOPWBUJWF.PEFM&WBMVBUJPO
„
„
„
Induction
„
Collaboration
„
Teacher Education Partnerships
„
Policy Analysis
44
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
E-mentoring Protocol (Infrastructure, Develop, Test, Produce)
Ongoing Dissemination/Technical Assistance
„
NCIPP will achieve these purposes through two phases:
1)"4&*-JUFSBUVSF4ZOUIFTFTBOE1PMJDZ"OBMZTJT
Evaluation Study (Case Study: Descriptions, Linking Mentoring to
Outcomes)
„
„
Intensive (E-mentoring Protocol, Cyber Infrastructure, Case Studies,
Mentor/Mentee Interaction)
Targeted (IHE and LEA Communities of Practices, SEA, Quarterly
Webinars)
Universal (Web site, TA+D Network, CEC)
For more information, visit:
http://education.ufl.edu/grants/ncipp/index.php
!"#$%&'()*(!+,-(../(
Technical Assistance, Model Demonstration Projects,
and Dissemination of Information
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Technical Assistance, Demonstration Projects, Dissemination of Information,
and Implementation of Scientifically Based Research
Authorizing Provision
IDEA states, “There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such sums as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005
through 2010. From amounts appropriated under this subsection the Secretary shall reserve $1,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 to carry out a study on
Ensuring Accountability For Students Who Are Held To Alternative Achievement Standards. The Secretary may reserve an additional amount to carry
out this study if the Secretary determines the additional amount is necessary.”
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
48,549
49,549
48,800
PURPOSE
46,800
188,744
CEC RECOMMENDS
CEC recommends an appropriation of $188.7 million for the Technical
Assistance, Demonstration Projects, Dissemination of Information and
Implementation of Scientifically Based Research programs for FY 2013.
These funding levels are necessary to ensure the continuation of critical
activities in the area of technical assistance, demonstration projects,
dissemination of information, and implementation of scientifically
IDEA 2004 added a study on Ensuring Accountability for Students Who based research. The reauthorization of IDEA calls for greatly expanded
Are Held To Alternative Achievement Standards under the Studies
information and technical assistance at the school building and local
and Evaluation section. In addition, a new section was added titled
community levels, as well as enhanced support for teachers.
Interim Alternative Educational Settings, Behavioral Supports, and
Systemic School Interactions. The Secretary may award grants, and
enter into contracts and cooperative agreements, to support safe
learning environments that support academic achievement for all
students.
The purpose of this program is to make competitive grants to, or enter
into contracts or cooperative agreements with, eligible entities to
provide technical assistance, support model demonstration projects,
disseminate useful information, and implement activities that are
supported by scientifically based research.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 45
/),1%$*'=8'/"-9'::>'
Technical Assistance, Model Demonstration Projects,
and Dissemination of Information
NATIONAL CENTER ON EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES
(NCEO)
NCEO focuses its efforts in the following areas:
„
University of Minnesota
Purpose: This Center will provide technical assistance and
dissemination (TA&D) about proven and promising models for
response to intervention (RTI) and early intervening services (EIS)
to state and local educators, families, and other interested and
appropriate stakeholders nationally.
Method: The Center will work in four areas: (a) Knowledge
Production, which involves a Technical Review Committee of
national RTI and EIS experts that independently evaluate scientific
rigor, conditions for successful implementation, and the cultural
and linguistic competence of all identified models (and model
components) before this knowledge base is used to drive the Center’s
TA&D activities; (b) Technical Assistance implementation supports,
which involve expert training methods and follow-up activities to
scale up RTI and EIS on a broad scale, allowing state and district staff
to be informed consumers of research; (c) Information Dissemination,
which involves forming communities of RTI and EIS practice to
improve the likelihood that Center consumers will adopt proven and
promising models; and (d) Formative Evaluation, which involves an
annual assessment of the quality, implementation, impact, and cost
effectiveness of the program of services offered.
Products: It is expected the Center will build the capacity of at least
35 states, which will in turn support local districts in using RTI and
EIS with fidelity. It is further expected that educators and families
will support the process of change as proven and promising RTI and
EIS models are adopted and used to improve student services and
educational outcomes, including identifying students with specific
learning disabilities early and reducing disproportionality in special
education.
46
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
„
„
„
Needs Assessments and Information Gathering on the participation
and performance of students with disabilities in state and national
assessments and other educational reform efforts.
Dissemination and Technical Assistance through publications,
presentations, technical assistance, and other networking
activities.
State Data Collection Technical Assistance to assist states in
continuing to meet the challenges of collecting comprehensive,
accurate, and consistent data on the participation and
performance of students with disabilities.
Collaboration and Leadership to build on the expertise of others
and to develop leaders who can conduct needed research and
provide additional technical assistance.
NCEO offers the following materials and services to state
personnel, educators, parents, and others concerned with the
educational outcomes of all students:
„
„
„
„
„
An extensive publications list that includes technical reports, state
activity updates, policy documents, and self-study guides.
Criteria for evaluating existing policies on large-scale assessments.
Recommendations for developing assessment policies and
guidelines for participation, accommodations, reporting, and
accountability that include all students.
Current information on assessment projects and other efforts to
collect data on the educational outcomes of all students.
A national network of people who can assist states and other
agencies as they consider assessment issues.
http://cehd.umn.edu/nceo/
/),1%$*'>8'/"-9':?78':?=8':?>'
Parent Training and Information Centers, Community Parent Resource Centers,
and Technical Assistance for Parent Training and Information Center
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Parent Training and Information Centers, Community Parent Resource Centers,
and Technical Assistance for Parent Training and Information Centers
Authorizing Provision
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section “such sums” as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
27,028
28,028
28,000
28,900
117,984
PURPOSE
CEC RECOMMENDS
The purpose of this section is to ensure that:
CEC recommends an appropriation of $117.9 million for the Parent
Training and Information Centers, Community Parent Resource
Centers, and Technical Assistance for Parent Training and Information
Centers for FY 2013. This investment is critical in order to support
parents of children with disabilities to work in collaboration with
professionals to meet the needs of their children.
1. Children with disabilities and their parents receive training
and information designed to assist the children in meeting
developmental and functional goals and challenging academic
achievement goals, and in preparing to lead productive
independent adult lives;
2. Children with disabilities and their parents receive training and
information on their rights, responsibilities, and protections
under this title to develop the skills necessary to cooperatively
and effectively participate in planning and decision making
related to early intervention, educational, and transitional
services; and
3. Parents, teachers, administrators, early intervention personnel,
related services personnel, and transition personnel receive
coordinated and accessible technical assistance and information
to assist such personnel in improving early intervention,
educational, and transitional services and results for children
with disabilities and their families.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 47
/),1%$*'>8'/"-9':?78':?=8':?>'
Parent Training and Information Centers
PARENT TRAINING AND INFORMATION CENTER OF
IOWA: ACCESS FOR SPECIAL KIDS RESOURCES
CENTER, INC.
Purpose: The goals of this project are to:
(a) Enhance the development of infants and toddlers with disabilities
and the capacity of families to meet the special needs of their
children by assisting the state of Iowa in providing a comprehensive
system of early intervention services;
(b) Help children with disabilities meet challenging standards
and prepare them for postsecondary education, employment, and
independent living by assisting state and local education agencies in
providing these children with a free appropriate public education; and
(c) Help parents better understand the Individualized Education
Program process to become better advocates for their children in
collaboration with school personnel.
48
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
Method: This project works in a wide range of locales, from
rural to urban. It also has a long-established set of collaborative
relationships with parents, schools, service providers, agencies,
disability organizations, community organizations representing
underserved populations (e.g., low-income, limited-English proficient
children, parents with disabilities, and parents of children who may
be inappropriately identified as having a disability), and others who
serve children with disabilities and their families.
Activities include information dissemination and providing training
and support to help parents understand their children’s disabilities,
their rights and responsibilities under the Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act, and learning how to take leadership positions in
advocating for their child’s education.
Access for Special Kids Resources Center, Inc.
http://www.askresource.org/index.html
/),1%$*'>8'/"-9':?@'
Technical Development, Demonstration, and
Utilization; and Media Services
PART D SUPPORT PROGRAMS
Technical Development, Demonstration, and Utilization; and Media Services
Authorizing Provision
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section “such sums” as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
38,615
43,973
28,600
PURPOSE
The purpose of this section is to ensure that appropriate technology
and media are researched, developed, and demonstrated to improve
and implement early intervention, education, and transitional
services and results for children with disabilities and their families.
CEC RECOMMENDS
CEC recommends an appropriation of $117.9 million in FY 2013. IDEA
2004 authorized the National Instructional Materials Access Center.
This center improves accessibility to print instructional materials,
including textbooks, to individuals who are blind or other persons
with print disabilities. The potential of technology to improve
and enhance the lives of individuals with disabilities is virtually
unlimited. Progress in recent years has demonstrated the need for
intensified support to facilitate technological development and
innovation into the 21st century.
29,600
117,984
SPECIAL EDUCATION TECHNOLOGY AND MEDIA
SERVICES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES,
TELEVISION ACCESS, MINNESOTA
Purpose: The goal of this project is to provide 875 hours of high
quality, nationally distributed description of educational programs
in order to enhance the experience of children who are blind or have
low vision, pre-K through elementary school.
Method: Activities of this project include:
(a) Helping to bridge the academic and social gap between blind
and sighted children in the classroom by describing educational
programming;
(b) Providing an opportunity for blind and sight-impaired adults to
share television viewing with their children;
(c) Working with program partners like Nickelodeon and the
National Educational Telecommunications Association;
(d) Selecting programs with the consultation and approval of
the CaptionMax Consumer Advisory Board, who will also provide
continuous feedback on the effectiveness of the video description;
and
(e) Delivering audio and video files that may be used to create
accessible media formats for DVD and the Web.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 49
/),1%$*'>8'/"-9':?@'
Supports to Improve Results for Children With Disabilities
50
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
$"/"%$-A'3.'
/1"-3%&'"#)-%*3(.
RESEARCH IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
Authorizing Provision
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section “such sums” as may be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2010.
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
70,585
71,085
51,000
OVERVIEW
IDEA 2004 moved special education research from Part D to the
Institute of Education Sciences (IES), which was established by the
Education Science Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA). As the research arm
of the U.S. Department of Education, IES is tasked with providing
rigorous evidence to help guide education practice and policy. Within
IES, the National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER)
conducts research and innovation activities related to the education
of children with disabilities. The mission of NCSER is to:
„
„
„
To sponsor research to expand knowledge and understanding of
the needs of infants, toddlers, and children with disabilities in
order to improve the developmental, educational, and transitional
results of such individuals;
To sponsor research to improve services provided under, and
support the implementation of, the Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.); and
To evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act in coordination with the
National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
49,900
200,572
Since its inception, NCSER has funded nearly 100 new research and
training projects on topics such as:
„
„
„
„
Early intervention and early childhood special education;
Interventions for children with low- and high-incidence
disabilities;
Interventions to improve reading, writing, and language
development for children with disabilities;
Interventions to improve outcomes for students with serious
behavioral disorders;
„
Teacher quality;
„
Mathematics and science education;
„
Transition outcomes for secondary students with disabilities;
„
Autism spectrum disorders;
„
Systems-level interventions in special education;
„
Postdoctoral research training grant program in special education
to increase the supply of scientists and researchers in special
education.
.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 51
$"/"%$-A'3.'
/1"-3%&'"#)-%*3(.
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
Research in special education and its dissemination to practitioners in the field is critical
to ensuring compliance with provisions within the Individuals With Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act/No Child Left Behind
(NCLB). These two important laws require the use of evidence-based interventions.
However, in FY 2011 federal funding for research in special education was cut by 28%,
leaving this program inadequately funded to fully achieve its mission. Educators and
early interventionists rely on research findings by NCSER to expand and enhance their
knowledge, understanding, and services for children and youth with disabilities. Without
the research, the field will not be able to continue serving children youth, families, and
professionals. This cut is unacceptable. CEC believes that a significant increase in funding
is crucial to ensure that children and youth with disabilities have access to the innovation
they deserve.
“Investing in special education research today
enables educators to utilize evidence-based
practices, resulting in better educational
outcomes for students with disabilities
tomorrow. In fact, NCLB and IDEA require the
use of scientifically based interventions and
instruction, yet federal funding for special
education research has been cut by 40% since
2005. Our students’ outcomes and the efforts
of educators are undercut when the federal
government does not provide a sufficient
investment in special education research.”
CEC RECOMMENDS
Linda Lewis
Governmental Relations Liaison for CEC
Division for Research and Coordinator of
Federal Policies and Programs, College of
Education, University of Oregon
To support research in special education and early intervention for infants, toddlers, and children
with disabilities, CEC recommends an appropriation of $200.6 million for special education
research for FY 2013. This additional funding would support grants that focus on understanding
the needs of children with disabilities. Furthermore, it would enable practitioners to access
scientifically/evidence-based research, as mandated by IDEA and NCLB.
Research in Special Education
$ 85,000
$ 80,000
$ 75,000
$ 70,000
$ 65,000
$ 60,000
$ 50,000
$ 40,000
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
52
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$ 83,104
$ 71,840
$ 71,840
$ 70,600
$ 70,585
$ 71,085
$ 51,000
$ 49,900
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
RESEARCH IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
The researchers study the potential effects of the quantity and
content of teacher preparation courses as well as the number,
content, and timing of inservice professional development courses.
The findings of this project may suggest best practices for preparing
teachers for students with disabilities. By identifying those
characteristics of inservice professional development training that
are associated with better outcomes for students with disabilities,
the researchers are laying the groundwork for creating professional
development programs that are more likely to improve the quality of
instruction and student outcomes.
THE EFFECTS OF TEACHER PREPARATION AND
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON SPECIAL
EDUCATION TEACHER QUALITY
Tim Sass, Principal Investigator
Florida State University
Teacher quality has a profound impact on student achievement and
educational attainment, but research has produced few definitive
findings on how best to prepare high quality teachers. The researchers
on this project analyze data from the Florida Education Data
Warehouse to evaluate the potential impact of preservice and
inservice teacher training experiences on academic achievement, high
school graduation, and postsecondary education and employment
outcomes for students with disabilities. This analysis is made possible
by the remarkable comprehensiveness of this data warehouse, which
contains individual-level longitudinal data for the universe of public
school students and teachers in Florida from 1995 forward, including
approximately 400,000 special education students each year.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 53
!"#$%&'(&!")*+,&&
Gifted and Talented&Students Education Act
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT
Dollars (in thousands)
FY 2009
FY 2010
FY 2011
FY 2012
FY 2013 CEC
APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION RECOMMENDED
7,463
7,463
0
0
20,000
PURPOSE
FUNDING CONSIDERATIONS
Established in 1988, the Javits Act is the only federal program
dedicated to addressing the unique educational needs of students
with gifts and talents. Recognizing that gifted education varies
dramatically within and between states, the Javits Act seeks to create
a research and practice infrastructure to advance the availability of
gifted education throughout the nation.
Dubbed the “quiet crisis” by former Secretary of Education Richard
Riley in 1993, the availability and funding of gifted education still
varies dramatically between and within states, leaving many of our
nation’s schools underprepared to meet the unique learning needs
of 3 million academically gifted learners. Unfortunately, the federal
government has done little to properly address the educational needs
of students with gifts and talents. In fact, research indicates that the
educational system systematically shortchanges certain populations
of students capable of reaching high levels of academic performance.
The Javits Act focuses its resources on children from backgrounds
who have been underrepresented in gifted education programs:
students with disabilities, English language learners, and individuals
from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Through a system of
competitive research, state capacity-building grants, and a national
research center on gifted education, the Javits Act fills a critical
need in our nation’s education system. In authorizing the Javits Act,
Congress recognized that our nation’s ability to compete tomorrow
depends on how well schools challenge advanced students in our
classrooms today.
Major initiatives of the Javits Act include:
ƒ National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
provides stakeholders with scientifically based research on
methods and techniques to identify and serve gifted learners
among other initiatives;
ƒ Competitive demonstration grants to institutions of higher
education and state and local education agencies to develop and
expand models serving students who are underrepresented in
gifted and talented programs; and
ƒ Competitive grants to state agencies and school districts
to implement programs that would enhance gifted education
offerings statewide.
Despite this critical need, Congress voted to eliminate all funding
for the Javits program for fiscal year 2012, leaving the National
Research Center on the Gifted and Talented and 12 demonstration
grants without future funding. Moreover, the President’s FY 2013
budget proposal also did not recommend funding the Javits program,
resulting in an absence of any dedicated funding for programs that
focus on the needs of students with gifts and talents.
CEC urges Congress to reverse course and demonstrate its
commitment to meeting the educational needs of children with
gifts and talents by funding the Javits program at $20 million. By
neglecting the educational needs of these students, we put our
country at a disadvantage to effectively compete in the global
marketplace and deprive them of an appropriate, challenging
education.
GROWING “EXCELLENCE GAP” AT TOP
ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS
Although there has been a substantial focus on closing achievement
gaps at lower levels of performance, policy makers have given little
attention to the growing excellence gap, the difference between
disadvantaged students and their more advantaged peers at the top
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 55
B%-(,'+9'B%43*/''
Gifted and Talented'Students Education Act
levels of achievement. Recent research at Indiana University analyzing
data derived from the National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) and state assessments demonstrates the existence of an
excellence gap which will take up to a century to close among various
subgroups.
Despite the fact that students with gifts and talents exist in
Unfortunately, federal and state policy makers have largely ignored the
excellence gap, investing few resources into gifted education programs.
In the absence of federal support, states—and more often, local school
districts—are forced to decide if and how much to invest in gifted
education. State commitments to gifted education vary dramatically
with some states mandating and funding gifted education and others
remaining virtually silent on the issue. Furthermore, a closer look at the
distribution of gifted education programs within states—including
those states with mandates and funding—expose a concentration of
gifted programs in more affluent school districts, thereby neglecting
students with high potential from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Although the Javits Act seeks to directly address this issue, its lack of
funding has hamstrung efforts to achieve its goals.
traditionally underserved populations such as students who are
every community throughout the country, the availability of
gifted education varies dramatically between and within states.
Even states that do fund gifted education often do not focus on
economically disadvantaged, English language learners, or who
IBWFEJTBCJMJUJFT'BSUPPPGUFOTUVEFOUTXJUIHJGUTBOEUBMFOUTHP
without the services and supports they need to succeed.
To address these inconsistencies, the federal government must
QSPWJEFBHSFBUFSJOWFTUNFOUJOUIF+BWJUT"DUXIJDITFFLTUPCVJME
the capacity of states to provide gifted education opportunities
to all students, with a concentration on those who have been
traditionally underserved.
Courtesy of the Davidson Institute:
www.davidsongifted.org/db/state_policies.aspx
to change
56
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT
CEC RECOMMENDS
At a time when the nation recognizes the importance of remaining globally competitive, Congress has eliminated funding for the only federal
program that addresses the educational needs of students with gifts and talents.
CEC recommends reversing course and investing in the Javits Act by allocating an appropriation of $20 million to enable the Javits program to
better support its research, and state and local grant initiatives.
Investment in Brightest Students on the Decline
$ 15,000
In 2012, Congress eliminated all
federal funding for the Javits Act, the
only federal program dedicated to
addressing the needs of students with
gifts and talents.
$ 10,000
$ 5,000
$0
Appropriation
Dollars
(in thousands)
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
$ 11,022
$ 9,596
$ 7,596
$ 7,463
$ 7,463
$ 7,463
$ 7,463
0
CONSEQUENCES OF UNDERFUNDING
“Through my work on the U-STARS~PLUS Javits Grant, I had the
privilege of working with over 75 school districts in six states to
support teachers in recognizing and nurturing potential in children
from economically disadvantaged and/or culturally diverse families
and children with disabilities to improve achievement and provide
access to advanced educational opportunities.
There are students with gifts and talents in every community
whose unique learning needs require adaptations to the general
education curriculum to ensure they remain challenged, engaged,
and motivated learners. Grants provided under the Javits Act seek
to fulfill this mission.
Although the U-STARS~PLUS grant has concluded, we are currently
implementing the program in North Carolina (18 school districts),
Colorado (8 school districts), Ohio (5 school districts), and Louisiana
(1 school district) impacting approximately 100 schools, 1,000
teachers, and 25,000 children.
Underfunding the Javits Act jeopardizes the creation, expansion,
and sustainability of programs like U-STARS~PLUS. Our program
has—and continues to—impact thousands of children who
otherwise go unnoticed.”
Mary Ruth Coleman
Senior Scientist FPG Child Development Institute
UNC-Chapel Hill
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 57
B%-(,'+9'B%43*/''
Gifted and Talented'Students Education Act
SCALING UP JAVITS GRANTS: HOW SMALL GRANTS WITH BROAD IMPACT ARE CHANGING THE LIVES OF
STUDENTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY
The purpose of the Javits Act is to identify best practices in gifted
education for students traditionally underrepresented in gifted
education programs—such as students from low-socioeconomic
backgrounds, students with disabilities, and English language learners.
ƒ Enhanced expectations for all students;
Over the 20-year existence of the Javits Act, federal funds have been
used to conduct over 125 research grants to determine effective
strategies for identifying and serving underrepresented students in
gifted education, including providing professional development for
teachers to better recognize and differentiate instruction to promote
higher order thinking skills.
Project U-STARS~PLUS: Originally, this grant was a collaboration
between the University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill and three
rural districts in North Carolina to use high-quality science instruction
to support the early recognition of high potential for K-3 students
from economically disadvantaged and/or culturally and linguistically
diverse families.
The strategies developed as a result of the Javits Act have resulted
in increased standardized test scores, increased mastery of content
and higher order concepts, and changes in teaching practices to
better serve high ability students—particularly students from
disadvantaged backgrounds.
Although grant funding has ended, U-STARS~PLUS has proved to be
a self-sustaining program that continues to expand. It is currently
being implemented in 38 school districts and 100 schools in North
Carolina, Colorado, Louisiana, Ohio, Illinois, and Wisconsin. Over 1,000
kindergarten through third-grade teachers are involved and more
than 21,000 young children have been impacted. The original team
at UNC-Chapel Hill continues to provide contact support to teachers
participating in U-STARS~PLUS.
Although the Javits program does not provide funding for scale-up
or dissemination activities, many strategies discovered and tested
through the Javits Act have been replicated throughout the nation,
such as:
Gifted Education Curriculum Developed by the College of William
and Mary: In 1988, the College of William and Mary received its first
Javits grant to develop tailored curriculum units for low-income,
minority students. Over the course of 20 years, and multiple Javits
grants, the curriculum developed—which focuses on science,
language arts (reading comprehension), and social studies—has
impacted 600,000 students, distributed to school districts in all 50
states and 28 countries, and has trained 60,000 teachers. Results
include:
ƒ Improved student performance on standardized assessments,
including for students who are eligible for Title I;
ƒ African American students had greater growth trajectories on
achievement tests (ITBS) and critical thinking assessments;
58
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
ƒ Lasting professional development.
.PSFJOGPIUUQXXXFSJDFEHPW1%'4&%QEG
.PSFJOGPIUUQXXXGQHVODFEV_TOBQTIPUT4OBQ@645"34
1%'
Project M3: Mentoring Mathematical Minds: Project M3 math
curriculum for students in Grades 3 to 5 is used in 46 states and
foreign countries including Singapore and Korea, though its
original focus was on 10 schools of varying socioeconomic levels in
Connecticut and Kentucky. Additionally, M3 has been modified for
younger students as part of a National Science Foundation Grant.
M3 consists of a series of advanced math curriculum—one to two
grades levels beyond the general education curriculum—and focuses
on the development of critical and creative thinking skills in problem
solving.
.PSFJOGPIUUQXXXQSPKFDUNPSH
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT
THE NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER ON THE GIFTED AND TALENTED (NRC/GT)
The National Research Center addresses the unique needs of advanced
learners from diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds and
provides guidance to educators across the country.
The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented (NRC/GT)
plans and conducts high-quality research programs that are theory
driven, problem based, practice relevant, and consumer oriented. Its
mission includes a broad-based, dissemination function that targets
practitioners, parents, and policy makers as well as other researchers.
This mission also includes the formation of a community of scholars
that work cooperatively to advance the scientific contributions to the
field.
There are three major components of the mission of the NRC/GT:
„
Research emphasizes factors related to identifying, nurturing, and
developing a broad range of talent potentials in students from
diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds.
The NRC/GT is funded by the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented
Students Education Act. It is a nationwide cooperative of researchers,
practitioners, policy makers, and other persons and groups that
have a stake in developing the performance and potentials of young
people from preschool through postsecondary levels.
Its consortium consists of:
Three Core Research-I Universities (University of Connecticut,
University of Virginia, and Yale University);
„
Over 360 Collaborative School Districts representing every state
and two territories (Guam and U.S. Virgin Islands);
„
Content Area Consultant Bank that consists of over 165 researchers
throughout the United States and Canada;
„
Twenty Senior Scholars at Collaborating Universities; and
„
Fifty-two State and Territorial Departments of Education agencies,
and other persons and agencies who can benefit from the work of
the Center.
„
„
„
Research examines the larger contexts of school and community
in which studies are conducted, and examines how contextual
factors influence research and why certain outcomes were or were
not achieved.
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt
Creation of a nationwide cooperative of researchers, practitioners,
policy makers, and other persons and groups that have a stake in
maximizing high-level performance in all of our young people.
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 59
B%-(,'+9'B%43*/''
Gifted and Talented'Students Education Act
JAVITS GRANT SEEKS TO INCREASE INTEREST IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATH (STEM)
DURING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
The Western Kentucky University Research Foundation, Inc., led by
Dr. Julia L. Roberts, was awarded a 5-year, $2 million Javits grant
to address the need for a steady supply of science, technology,
engineering, and math (STEM) students in Kentucky and the United
States.
Project GEMS Objectives:
The goal of Project GEMS (Gifted Education in Math and Science) is
to increase the number of elementary children who are advanced
in science and math and to foster their interest and achievement
in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. This goal
specifically targets children from low-income backgrounds and
minorities who are underrepresented in STEM careers.
3. Develop, implement, and assess problem-based science/math
units.
Project GEMS is a partnership between The Center for Gifted Studies
at Western Kentucky University (WKU) and the Warren County
Schools in Bowling Green, Kentucky. Project GEMS will provide
services that are not currently being offered for 240 elementary
students who are advanced in science and math at four elementary
schools. Additionally, 70 teachers from the four schools will receive
professional development in problem-based learning and gifted
education. Project GEMS will disseminate the results of the research
and develop an identification and services protocol for children who
are advanced in science and math. This project can be replicated in
the district, state, and beyond.
5. Develop, implement, and assess a parent/community plan to
build support and encouragement for high-level science and math
instruction and opportunities to increase interest in STEM careers.
1. Establish a protocol for recognizing and identifying advanced
ability in science and math among elementary children.
2. Implement a problem-based curriculum in science and math.
4. Develop, implement, and assess business partnerships to foster
understanding of technological and scientific application in the
work place.
6. Collect data comparing achievement and interest in science and
math among an experimental group who will go to a science and
math magnet school and students who remain in their home
schools engaged in problem-based science and math,
and students who are not involved.
IUUQTXXXXLVFEV%FQU4VQQPSU4QPOT1SHHSBOUT
“Javits grants provide unique opportunities to engage in research
to develop effective strategies to identify and create interest in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics among
upper elementary children.”
m%S+VMJB-3PCFSUT%JSFDUPS
5IF$FOUFSGPS(JGUFE4UVEFOUTBU8FTUFSO,FOUVDLZ6OJWFSTJUZ
60
| COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
JACOB K. JAVITS GIFTED AND TALENTED STUDENTS EDUCATION ACT
PROJECT PROMISE LEADS TO GREATER
GIFTED EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES
FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE ECONOMICALLY
DISADVANTAGED IN VIRGINIA
Virginia students and teachers who participated in Project PROMISE, a
recently completed 4-year Javits grant, are still reaping the benefits.
With a focus on improving the ability of teachers to recognize
giftedness and high potential in elementary students (K-3) from
economically disadvantaged backgrounds through hands-on science
classes, the Project PROMISE model increased the achievement scores
of participating students in science and reading comprehension.
Furthermore, through the creation of high-quality professional
development and engaging instructional materials, teachers who
participated in Project PROMISE reported an increased ability to meet
the needs of all students, including high-ability students; a greater
ability to recognize giftedness among economically disadvantaged
students; and professional growth and confidence in teaching higher
order thinking strategies that could be used across disciplines.
Project PROMISE, a Javits grant, was a collaborative effort between
the Virginia Department of Education, The College of William and
Mary, Greensville County, Martinsville City, and Prince William
County Public Schools. Although the grant has ended, scaling-up
and scaffolding efforts still continue. Lessons learned—through
professional development and creation of instructional materials—
have had a lasting impact on educators and students.
PROJECT PROMISE PROFILE
Partners: Virginia Department of Education, The College
of William and Mary, Greensville County, Martinsville City,
and Prince William County Public Schools.
Duration: 2004-2008
Goals: To recognize giftedness and high potential in
students Grades K-3 from economically disadvantaged
backgrounds, and provide students with learning strategies
and skills that will empower them to be successful in gifted
education programs.
Outcomes: Increased achievement scores in science
and reading comprehension for participating students;
sustainable professional development focused on
recognizing giftedness and differentiating instruction to
address high-ability learners; and development of handson instructional materials.
'PSNPSFJOGPSNBUJPOTFF
http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/
HJGUFE@FEQSPKFDU@QSPNJTF
“Children of poverty do not always demonstrate their giftedness
in the same ways as high-economic children so it is especially
important to be aware of children who do view things in
VOVTVBMXBZTBOENBLFDPOOFDUJPOTRVJDLMZu
m1SPKFDU130.*4&5FBDIFS
FEDERAL OUTLOOK FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN 2013 | 61