Category: Kevin Joy
Dodd Amendment to Provide $1.2 Billion for Special Education
By Kevin Joy
WASHINGTON – The Senate has approved an amendment offered by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., that would more than double proposed federal spending increases for special education.
Educators applauded the potential increase, but described it as only a small step and called on the federal government to increase support for special education by more than 20 percent.
Dodd’s amendment would provide a $2.2 billion increase in federal special education spending for fiscal year 2004, which begins Oct. 1. The Senate bill, which had called for a $1 billion increase before the amendment was adopted Sept. 10, would bring special education aid to nearly $11.1 billion.
“We should provide children with disabilities a road to opportunity,” Dodd said in a statement. “This initiative will help ensure that the federal government does its fair share when it comes to ensuring the best education possible for children with special needs.”
But even with the proposed increase, Congress would continue to fall drastically short of a 28-year-old commitment to cover 40 percent of the national average per-student costs in special education, a provision of the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) that today serves more than 6 million children.
Connecticut received 6.7 percent of its special education funding from Washington in fiscal year 2002-although that figure is nearly double the 3.5 percent it collected five years earlier, said Brian Mahoney, an education manager for the state’s Department of Education. Nationally, federal funds cover 18 percent of special education budgets .
Approximately 75,000 of Connecticut’s 566,000 public school students are enrolled in some form of special education, including 635 in New London. The National Education Association estimates the average yearly expense of educating a special-needs student is $14,424, almost twice the $7,552 annual cost of teaching other students.
Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt., who cosponsored the amendment with Dodd and Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., said educators were burdened by a combination of insufficient federal dollars and the numerous, expensive development standards mandated under President Bush’s sweeping education reform law, No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
Even though Connecticut was awarded $103.9 million in special education money this year — up from $61 million in 2000, local dollars still account for almost 60 percent of Connecticut’s special-education costs, with the state providing most of the remaining funds, according to the state’s bureau of special education programs chief, George Dowaliby.
“The federal increases are generally absorbed by the annual rise in costs of services,” Dowaliby said, adding that even double-digit growth in government funding rarely covers the necessary costs of state special-needs programs. Many cities, both in New England and nationwide, often raise property taxes or redirect funds from their general education budgets to cover the difference, according to statements by Dodd and Jeffords.
New London public schools have not cut money from other programs to pay for special education, said Christine Carter, the district’s acting director of special services.
However, New London is targeting more students for special education than it used to, prompting it to hire and train more classroom aides and to increase spending on special-education preschool, psychological services and additional help for autistic students.
“To meet all of these needs is becoming a financial burden on the district,” said Carver, who criticized a low level of state, as well as federal, spending. “We are required to provide educational services with increased responsibility and at a costly expense.”
But even if the federal government agreed to pay 40 percent of the cost of special education, Dowaliby said some states would get significantly less because the figure is based on a national average.
“If the federal government fulfilled its promise of full funding, there would still be a smaller percentage given to Connecticut,” Dowaliby said. “But if they reimbursed each state 40 percent, then that would be the ideal scenario.”
Dodd Introduces Child Pediatric Pain Treatment Bill
By Kevin Joy
WASHINGTON - Before a gathering of children that have survived life-threatening illnesses and their families, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., on Tuesday announced the introduction of legislation , that would provide $35 million aimed at improving pediatric pain treatment methods for seriously ill children.
Co-sponsoring the Compassionate Care for Children Act of 2003 and speaking with Dodd was Sen. Mike DeWine, R-Ohio, and Reps. Deborah Pryce, R-Ohio, and John Murtha, D-Pa. Their proposal would provide grants to doctors and nurses for training and education in how to provide end-of-life care to children and money for research in pain and symptom management.
"The critical issue here is about choices," Dodd said. "Far too many brave children living with terminal illnesses are forced to endure preventable pain and suffering."
The nation's health care system does not account for the special needs of children, the co-sponsors said. Under Medicaid, the parents of a child diagnosed with fewer than six months to live are required to choose between painkilling and medicinal treatment. So if parents, for example, place a dying child under hospice care, they must sign a "do not resuscitate" order, and the child is denied direct healing services like chemotherapy or surgery.
DeWine said the proposed legislation would permit simultaneous pain management and disease treatment for such children, which today allows only a limited number of hospice-approved doctors to see them, excluding outside physicians and specialists.
"This bill would allow parents not to make an impossible choice-one no parent should have to make," he said. "Many of these children do not get the care they need."
According to the National Association of Pediatric Hospitals, approximately 1 million children in the United States are living with a life-threatening illness, and fewer than 10 percent of terminally ill children who die each year receive any sort of hospice care during their last days.
But determining the life expectancy of a seriously ill child can be difficult, and existing health care rules do not account for sick children living significantly beyond a doctor's diagnosis, says Ann Langley, senior council for public policy for the National Association of Children's Hospitals.
"Medicaid and private insurance follow Medicare guidelines designed for the elderly," Langley said. "When hospice care became a required benefit of Medicaid, it wasn't written with children in mind."
Approximately 50 percent of those on Medicaid are children, according to Langley, and the difficult, restrictive choices that confront parents of children with life-threatening diseases are different from the issues affecting the aged.
"It's much different choosing hospice care if you are 80 years old and have six months to live," Langley said. "Families don't want to make that choice for a child-and the child certainly can't make that choice."
She also praised the legislation because it would help finance children's hospices, many of which have underpaid staffs and programs lacking operational funds.
Dodd, who introduced the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, which now permits eligible employees up to three months of unpaid leave to care for a newborn, an adopted child or a family member or to take time off because of a severe health condition, stressed the equal importance of the new legislation and was met with a round of applause from parents and the approximately 25 children who joined him on stage.
"It was once a radical notion to choose between children and families and your job during a time of illness," Dodd said, "But to say to somebody that you've got to make a choice regarding your child's care-to me, that's just wrong."
"We're going to pass this. I promise."
Shortage in Title I School Funding Draws Criticism From Educators
By Kevin Joy
WASHINGTON - Connecticut educators said Congress appears unlikely to give the state enough money to meet strict new standards set by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, President Bush's plan to overhaul education and improve public schools.
Educators said spending bills currently before Congress reduce federal support for Title I, which provides federal aid to schools in low-income areas. While educators nationwide were expecting Title I to reach the $18.5 billion proposed by Bush, bills facing votes in Congress would cut that number to $12.4 billion for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. And the Senate, in a 51-44 vote Wednesday, killed an amendment offered by Robert Byrd, D-W.V., that would have fully funded the Title I program.
Teachers and administrators argue the $6 billion shortfall will greatly affect their ability to meet the law's numerous requirements, which include yearly testing in grades three through eight, increased standards for teachers and aides and greater accountability for schools that don't meet state standards.
"We're certainly concerned that the amount of funding was lower than expected," said Robert Rader, executive director of Connecticut Boards of Education. "To get less than expected is detrimental to our schools."
Connecticut is one of 39 states that is likely to receive less federal education money than expected in the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1, according to Thomas Murphy, spokesman for the Connecticut Department of Education He said Connecticut is slated to receive $2 million less for Title I than it expected. This year, Connecticut received $101 million in federal funding for Title I.
New London Public Schools expects to receive $1.45 million in Title I funding in fiscal 2004, a decrease of $14,139 from this year. While the difference may appear small, it does not account for increased program costs and new requirements for testing, parental involvement and professional development, said Sandra Carrington, the district's director of Grants, Extended Learning and Strategic Planning.
"Without additional funding, it places huge restraints on programs for our students," she said.
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) blasted the reduced funding at a press conference here last week.
"We were given a commitment by the President of the United States and he made a commitment to America's children," Dodd said. "If you think it's going to be important to fight terrorism and global threats, then you'd better start investing in a population that's going to have the tools to meet those tremendous threats and obligations."
A number of administrators said they supported the law's goals, particularly that all students become proficient in reading, language arts and mathematics by the year 2014. "The goals behind it are noble," said Thomas Murphy, spokesman for the Connecticut Department of Education. However, Murphy said local officials are "very worried" about the lack of funding.
"We originally saw No Child Left Behind as an opportunity to get more resources, but we're spending millions on paperwork and bureaucracy," said Rosemary Coyle, president of the Connecticut Education Association and a third-grade teacher in Montville, Conn.. "It's an absolutely flawed piece of legislation."
Three schools in New London and 149 statewide have failed to meet the required proficiency levels, according to a report released last month by the state Department of Education. And whether or not a school labeled deficient is actually underperforming, administrators said such evaluations place negative stigmas on the schools, , as well as their teachers, students and parents.
The law requires that all racial and ethnic groups, special education students and pupils whose first language is not English progress at the same rate as their school's general student body.
Schools that fail to meet state standards within two years risk losing federal money. They also are required to pay transportation costs for some students, particularly those from low-income families, whose parents want them to transfer to better schools. "We're quite used to such high stakes of accountability," said Richard P. Foye, interim superintendent of the New London Public Schools. "But it's harder to deliver services to students in need and receive less financial help with more requirements."
