A Closer Look at “Education Deregulation” in Senate Bill 3

by | Dec 22, 2016 | Legislation

What happened during the lame duck session?

By now, you know the legislative session has concluded. Sub. SB 3, which became a Christmas tree bill, contained a plethora of miscellaneous education provisions. The bill has been signed and will become effective mid-March. I thought you might like a short summary of the provisions that will apply to most of our clients. If you have specific questions about what is applicable to career technical education or educational service center districts, please let us know. I will follow up next week with a look at other recently passed bills.

 Time Spent on State Assessments

After July 1, 2017, boards of education must ensure that no student is required to:

  1. Spend more than 2 percent of the school year taking state assessments in 3301.0710(A) and 3301.0712(B)(2) or any district-wide assessment in subject area or grade level.
  2. Spend more than 1 percent of the school year taking practice or diagnostic assessments to prepare for assessments described above.

This limitation does not apply to students with disabilities or to students who don’t obtain a passing score on English language arts achievement assessments, substitute exams, or additional assessments to identify a student as gifted.

Boards may exceed these limits upon a resolution of the board after “at least one” public hearing on the proposed resolution.

The bill removed a requirement that districts report to the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) the amount of extracurricular services offered to students.

Education Deregulation Provisions

 Districts that qualify are exempt from:

  1. Teacher qualification requirements under the 3rd-grade reading guarantee of 3313.608. Teachers still must have a valid Ohio license in the subject area and grade level “determined appropriate by the board of education.”
  2. The mentoring component of the Ohio teacher residency program, as long as there is a local approach to train and support new teachers.
  3. Any statute, ODE rule, or standard on minimum or maximum class size.
  4. Any Revised Code or ODE standard requiring teachers to be licensed specifically in the grade level they are teaching unless required by federal law. This does not apply to special education teachers. Teachers still must have a valid Ohio license in the subject area and “at least some grade level determined appropriate by the district board.”

Notwithstanding 3319.36 and 3319.30, a superintendent may employ a person not licensed but otherwise qualified based on experience to teach in the district, provided that the board of education approves employment and provides mentoring and development opportunities as determined necessary. These employees must have criminal background checks and register with ODE during employment. ODE will enroll these employees in the retained fingerprint database. These employees are members of the State Teachers Retirement System. If arrested, ODE will notify the district, and the district may not employ anyone with an offense that would bar employment with the school as listed in R.C. 3319.31. Noncompliance with this section of the law will not disqualify this district from R.C. Chapter 3317 funds.

To qualify for these exemptions, districts must meet all the following benchmarks on the most recent report card:

  1. At least 85 percent of total possible points for performance index score
  2. An A on performance indicators on the state report card as defined in R.C. 3302.03
  3. A four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate of 93 percent and a five-year adjusted cohort graduation rate of 95 percent

Districts that meet the qualifications on the most recent report card get these exemptions for three years, beginning with the year the qualifying report card is issued.

Competitive bidding: Sub. SB 3 contains a provision that raises the competitive bidding threshold from $25,000 to $50,000. Check your policy to see if it mentions the specific amount, and if so, revise the policy. Remember that this change will not take effect until the legislation effective date in mid-March, so continue to use the $25,000 threshold until the bill becomes law.

Blizzard bags: Districts adopt a plan for the use of blizzard bags, and the board-adopted plan no longer has to be approved by ODE. Otherwise the requirements are the same.

Nonpublic extracurricular activities: The superintendent may allow any student enrolled in nonpublic school to participate in district extracurricular activities if they are not offered at the nonpublic school and either of the following apply:

  1. The extracurricular activity is not interscholastic athletics or interscholastic contests or competition in music, drama, or forensics, or
  2. The activity is in an interscholastic athletic or contest or competition in music, drama, or forensics.

That is not a typo (see options above). The law says that for the second option to apply, students must seek to participate at either the district in which the student’s nonpublic school is located or the district in which the student is entitled to attend school (understanding that the district in which the student’s nonpublic school is located may not be the same as the district in which the child is entitled to attend school). As long as the chosen district offers the activity, if the student seeks to participate at the public school in which the student’s nonpublic school is located, both of the following must apply:

  1. The superintendent of the school in which child is entitled to attend shall certify that the student has not participated in any other extracurricular activities that school year, defined as interscholastic athletic events or interscholastic competition in music, drama, or forensics. If the student has participated that school year, the student is ineligible to participate in the district in which the nonpublic school is located.
  2. Superintendents of both schools shall mutually agree in writing to allow the student to participate in the public school in which the student’s nonpublic school is located.

Athletic participation for College Credit Plus (CCP) and STEM students: Students cannot be denied the opportunity to participate in athletics just because the student is in CCP or has been in CCP as long as the student fulfills all other academic/nonacademic/financial requirements not related to participation. This provision also applies to CCP students who attend STEM, community schools, nonpublic schools, or home instruction.

Seal of biliteracy: A new section of the Revise Code provides for the addition of a seal of biliteracy, attached or affixed to a high school diploma. The seal demonstrates a high level of proficiency in one or more languages in addition to English “sufficient for meaningful use in college and a career.”

Public schools, STEM schools, community schools, college preparatory boarding schools or nonpublic schools may affix the seal of biliteracy to transcripts that meet requirements, but it is not required to attach the seal to the transcript.

Districts must maintain records to identify students who have completed the requirements for the seal, and if the district has a policy of attaching or affixing the seal to transcripts, the district shall make a designation on the transcript.

The state board will establish requirements and criteria for earning the state seal, including foreign language assessments and English proficiency.

The state board will deliver an appropriate mechanism for assigning the seal to districts, provide any other information the state board considers necessary for districts, and adopt rules to implement this provision.

No fee is allowed for the seal, but students may be required to pay a fee to demonstrate proficiency in a language including the cost of a standardized test to determine proficiency.

Languages available for the biliteracy seal include modern languages, Latin, American Sign Language, Native American languages, and native languages.

Teacher evaluation: Beginning with the 2017–2018 school year, a board of education may elect not to evaluate a teacher participating in the teacher residency program under 3319.223 for the year during which the teacher takes, for the first time, at least half of the performance-based assessment prescribed by ODE for resident educators.

What’s inside the new door barricade device rules

by | May 3, 2016 | Construction & Real Estate, General

The Ohio Board of Building Standards has finalized the door barricade device rules mandated by HB 64. Found in the Ohio Building Code, the rules address active shooter drills, emergency situations, and establishes conditions for the use of the temporary locking devices.  The rules are effective as of April 18, 2016.

Generally, the building code requires door handles to be accessible, meaning they should not require tight grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist to operate. The new rules provide an exception to the building code for temporary locking devices. Doors also must require only one motion to unlatch a door, but an exception has been built into the code for barricade devices. The devices may not be permanently mounted to the door. Individual parts of the device, such as bolts, stops, brackets, pins, etc. that don’t prevent ingress or egress through the door may be mounted permanently. If they affect the fire rating of a rated fire door assembly, they may not be permanently mounted.

To use the devices in compliance with the new code, the school district must have:

1. Adopted and filed a school safety plan.

2. The barricade devices may be used only in an emergency or during active shooter drills.

3. Only a trained member of the school staff may use the devices for a finite period of time, as determined by the school administrative authority according to the school safety plan.

4. The district must provide training to school staff on the temporary locking device, keep records of the training, and provide those records to the fire official upon request.

5. The district must provide proof to the building official that the fire and police officials with jurisdiction over the school building have been notified about the placement of the temporary locking devices.

6. The building official will approve the devices upon compliance with all rules, and will note the same on the certificate of occupancy.

Operation of the barricade device may not require more than one operation to be removed after it has been engaged. Two operations are permitted to remove the device only if the building has an automatic sprinkler system throughout the building. The building code notes that the Americans with Disabilities Act may affect the use and operation of temporary locking devices like door barricades, but states that this potential issue is outside the scope of the rules.

There are different vendors selling barricade devices, and not all of them may be compliant with the rules as outlined above. For example, the placement of the device (low, medium, or high on the door) or devices that require more than one motion to remove once engaged may be problematic. Carefully consider the requirements before selecting barricade devices for your schools: we suggest working with your local fire officials. Consult counsel for specific questions.

Bill would address concerns about weighted grades, College Credit Plus

by | Mar 22, 2016 | Legislation

college-credit-plusParents and students around Ohio are complaining about what they see as an inequity involving college credit plus (CCP) courses. In February, a group of high school students testified in front of the General Assembly that they believed the CCP rule that treats all college courses as being comparable to AP courses is unfair, because it can lead to relatively easy college courses being weighted the same as AP, International Baccalaureate (IB) or honors classes for GPA purposes. For instance, a student could take an entry-level CCP science course and receive the same weighted GPA as a high school AP Physics class.

Recently, ODE held a webinar reminding districts that they must follow the law as described above; i.e. that all college courses must be comparable to AP courses- and not penalize a student for taking CCP courses. ODE claimed that CCP parents and students feel “discriminated against” because they are potentially losing out on scholarships if the classes they take are not weighted the same as AP, IB, or honors courses.

Representatives Mike Dovilla and Marlene Anielski recently sponsored House Bill 445, which proposes to correct the perceived inequities. The bill would require school districts to award weighted credit for CCP courses that the district determines are comparable to AP, IB or honors classes. This would help eliminate concerns that students are “padding” their GPA by taking entry-level CCP courses.

The bill addresses a concern about the difference between the number of hours spent in a college course as opposed to a high school course. For instance, a student taking a college course spends about 45 hours in the classroom compared to 120 hours in an AP high school class. The bill states that one high school credit is equal to four credit hours of a college course, or the equivalent if the college operates on a quarter schedule.  Students attending public, non-public, community, STEM, and home instruction also would be permitted to participate in extracurricular activities while participating in CCP.

Taking a course on a college campus would be prohibited if a comparable class is being delivered through the CCP program in the school district. Clarification that textbooks and materials purchased for CCP belong to the entity that paid for them is part of the legislation. The bill currently is in the House Education Committee and has had its first hearing before the committee. We will continue to update clients as it moves through the legislative process. A link to the bill is available here: HB 445

Changes to Medicaid in Schools Plan Coming August 1, 2016

by | Feb 9, 2016 | Special Education

On January 27, 2016, the Director of the Department of Medicaid and ODE’s Director of the Office for Exceptional Children hosted a webinar that detailed the Medicaid billing changes coming to school districts as a result of changes to the Affordable Care Act (ACA) made in 2012, but only recently being applied to Ohio’s Medicaid Schools Plan (MSP).

Previously, in an October 2015 letter, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) found that Ohio’s MSP is out of compliance with its own state plan and the federal regulations because claims lack an appropriate prescription or referral from a medical practitioner. CMS is the federal entity that provides states with federal funds for Medicaid services, including the MSP. CMS concluded that claims filed under the MSP that do not contain this requirement after August 1, 2016 (the deadline set in the letter for full compliance) will not be reimbursable by Medicaid.

The Ohio Department of Medicaid was working with CMS to obtain an exemption or waiver of the requirements of the ACA as it relates to the MSP, but was unable to do so. The result of this unsuccessful negotiation has significant implications for all schools that provide services to students with disabilities pursuant to an IEP and eligible for Medicaid claim reimbursement.

If the State of Ohio is not in compliance with the ACA requirements, CMS will begin deferring IEP claims and Ohio could lose federal financial participation for Medicare through CMS. In fact, the federal regulations that require a prescription for services are not new requirements. Federal regulations state that Ohio’s State Medicaid Plan must require, among other things, all providers to be enrolled as participating providers, and that all claims for payment for services contain the national provider identifier (NPI) of the physician or professional referring or ordering the services. The change in the federal regulations occurred in 2012; however, Ohio’s noncompliant practice and procedure did not come to the attention of CMS until October.

The specific services for which a prescription, referral or order will be required from a medical provider are audiology, speech/language pathology, physical therapy, and occupational therapy. The provider may order multiple services if those services are in the IEP: for example, speech pathology and audiology or a combination of any of the services that requires a prescription. ODE reiterated during the webcast that services in the IEP must be delivered and cannot be denied, changed or modified based on the ability/inability to submit claims for reimbursement to Medicaid for services through the MSP.

A “provider” was defined in the January 27th webcast conducted by the Department of Medicaid Services and ODE as; a physician (MD or DO) an advanced practice nurse (APN), or a physician assistant (PA). School nurses who are RNs or LPNs are ineligible to order, refer or prescribe for these services. School therapists with a national provider number may not prescribe, order or refer the services either. School therapists will, however, continue to evaluate and provide services to students with disabilities, and document services for Medicaid school reimbursement.