NEO Advocates for Catholic Schools
Shining a Light on Catholic Education in Northeast Ohio
You are the light of the world. A city set on a mountain cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and then put it under a bushel basket; it is set on a lampstand, where it gives light to all in the house. (Matthew 5:14-15)
Northeast Ohio Catholic School Supporters,
It is an exciting time for Catholic schools -- among advocacy, healthy activity, and celebrations, great things are happening. Catholic Schools Week begins January 31 and will be punctuated by numerous school events as well as a diocesan-wide celebration of Mass by Bishop Malesic from the Cathedral (with virtual viewing) at 10 a.m. Tuesday.
The Governor’s executive budget will be unveiled as soon as next week, the first formal step in the state's budget process. Advocates for schools and other causes will then be most active through June 30. From now through then, we will update you regularly on the issues most important to Catholic schools. If you wish to learn more about the intricacies of the process, see the wonderful resource from the Center for Community Solutions called Follow The Money (4th Edition), available at the links or download free online here.
Below, as promised, is a summary from the Catholic Conference of Ohio detailing some of the legislative changes in the last session that pertain to schools. Most important to Catholic schools are the changes to EdChoice as well as the flexibility of alternate assessments for state testing, and some temporary COVID policies for subs and the Third Grade Reading Guarantee.
So far this COVID-19 year, every single Northeast Ohio Catholic schools has served students in person, fully or in hybrid, and most all are doing so currently. Catholic educators are being prioritized with all other school personnel in accordance with the state’s vaccination program. And all schools continue to offer a virtual option to families who choose it. More COVID-19 data is below.
Finally, today we near the close of National School Choice Week, and there is still time to like and support #schoolchoice on your favorite social media.
Please read on below for the full summary from the Catholic Conference as well as a recent primer from the Thomas B. Fordham foundation on funding misconceptions and a report on the growing public support for school choice. We hope you will join the growing numbers who advocate for the ability to choose Catholic schools!
Sincerely,
Frank O’Linn, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools, Catholic Diocese of Cleveland
School Funding Misconceptions
In light of the legislature's deep dive into school funding, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation's Aaron Churchill wrote recently on mischaracterizations of Ohio school funding that are commonplace in media reports. The full article, which was published just prior to the end of the last session, is available here. The following is an excerpt:
School funding has been front-and-center over the past month in Ohio with the high profile Cupp-Patterson plan driving media coverage. While the legislation itself has merits and drawbacks, the news reports on school funding have unfortunately been riddled with errors and misconceptions. That’s a shame, as the topic is already so poorly understood by the general public. This piece is not meant to criticize the entire press corps—many journalists work hard to understand the issue and report it accurately—but to illustrate some common myths that continue to be filtered through the media.
First up, a story in the Cleveland Plain Dealer. The article opens with this line:
“The Ohio House is expected to vote Thursday on a bill that would bring sweeping changes to how education is funded, since the current scheme was found unconstitutional 23 years ago.”
It’s true that the Ohio Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that the school funding system in place at that time was unconstitutional. But to say that the “current scheme” was found unconstitutional is nonsense. As I show in a new report, Ohio’s funding system is much different today than it was during the years in which the DeRolph lawsuit was being heard. Indeed, a reasonable reading of the data yields a conclusion that today’s system would probably pass constitutional muster with flying colors.
The article continues:
“HB 305 is the result of years of work and negotiations in the public education community, since it would change how much money the state’s 610 school districts receive from the state and raise locally for education.”
This bolded clause (emphasis mine) is an odd characterization of House Bill 305, the legislative version of the Cupp-Patterson plan. The sentence starts off well, correctly stating that the bill changes the amount of money districts receive from the state. But HB 305 wouldn’t necessarily change the amount of local funding received by districts. Under the plan, districts would, per continuing law, still be required to levy a minimum local property tax rate of 2 percent to receive state funds. They would still be allowed to supplement funding by asking local voters to approve higher tax rates. In the end, the plan doesn’t call for any changes to the way local tax rates are set or property values assessed.
A sentence later, the piece allows advocates to misrepresent Ohio’s current funding system:
“Proponents argue that the current funding scheme isn’t a formula and what they’ve created in HB 305 is one that is logical and can be defended.”
The proponents of HB 305 wrongly suggest that Ohio doesn’t have a school funding formula. Though suspended for FYs 2020–21, the state does indeed have one, and state legislators could easily restart the existing formula in the next biennium. Though it’s undermined by “caps and guarantees”—policies that work outside of the formula—the current model generally delivers state dollars, via formulas in state law, to the districts that need them the most. Unfortunately, only the proponents get their say about the current system. The article doesn’t include any comments from impartial sources (call me, maybe?) or even those who might oppose the plan.
National Survey finds support for school choice at all-time high
Survey Report:
https://www.edchoice.org/research/schooling-in-america-public-opinion-on-education-during-pandemic/
Parents wanting different educational settings for their children post-pandemic aligns with record-high support for school choice programs. In our fall survey, education savings accounts (ESAs) received the highest level of public support (81%) of any education choice policy in the eight years EdChoice has been polling the policy. Both support and opposition for school vouchers were likewise at all-time highs, while support for tax-credit scholarships (78%) increased significantly since 2019. These support levels were higher than those reported by PDK in its spring poll, which found a majority (53%) of Americans supported some form of private school choice, while the Manhattan Institute found in the fall that between 46 and 52 percent of voters in political battleground states believed giving parents the right to choose their children’s school would raise the overall quality of K–12 education in America.
COVID-19 Update
Below are the COVID-19 cases per capita reported on the state's data system for an apples-to-apples comparison of Diocese of Cleveland Catholic schools to the 8 counties in which they serve. Catholic schools are among the safest places to be! The holiday surge appears to be behind us, accounting for the recent bump in cases. We still see no transmissions traced to the classroom, in keeping with the state of Ohio’s research finding little to no spread at school where masks and distancing protocols are in place.
Estimated New EdChoice Expansion Incomes
The new law raises the EdChoice Expansion qualifying income from below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) to 250%. This will significantly increase eligibility, including for some students already enrolled in Catholic schools. While we await the official announcement by ODE, we can estimate by taking the current thresholds and multiplying to approximate new thresholds to be as follows:
Catholic Conference of Ohio Legislative Summary for End of 133rd GA
School Choice
Ed Choice (SB 89) – Establishes new student eligibility based on public schools meeting both of the following:
· the building is ranked in the lowest 20 of public schools within the performance index rankings in the two most recent years for which report cards are available;
· the building is operated by a school district in which, for the three school years prior to the school year for which the scholarship is sought, an average of 20 percent or more of the students entitled to attend school in the district were qualified to be included in the formula to distribute Title I funds;
The priority application for traditional EdChoice now opens on March 1, allowing the legislation to become effective before the application period.
A performance-based scholarship sought for the 2021-2022 or 2022- 2023 school year under the performance index ranking criteria must be based on performance index rankings for each of the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years. Performance index rankings for the 2020-2021 school year are only used to determine student eligibility beginning in the 2023-2024 school year.
Included is a provision for a student qualifying for a first time, performance-based scholarship for the 2021-2022 school year if the student meets all of the following:
· was enrolled in school in any of grades K-12, or homeschooled for the equivalent, in the 2020-2021 school year;
· qualified for a performance-based scholarship for the 2020-2021 school year;
· would be enrolled in a district school building that was Ed Choice designated in the 2019-2020 school year.
Per SB 89, the Legislative Service Commission’s simulation indicates 473 public schools will be on the Ed Choice list for the 2021-2022 school year. The ODE will authenticate the actual list of schools.
In addition, the income level for the EdChoice Expansion Program was increased from 200 to 250 percent over poverty for first-time families to be eligible for a scholarship. This adjustment will allow families to earn several thousand dollars more in income while meeting the poverty threshold for children to receive a scholarship. For example, the poverty threshold for a family of four is increased from $52,400 (200 percent) to $65,500 (250 percent). The Governor signed this legislation into law, effective by or before the date for the priority application.
Note – Continuing law: a student is not awarded an income-based scholarship if he or she is eligible for a traditional Ed Choice Scholarship.
HB 409 -- Safe harbor regarding state report card ratings for the 2020-2021 school year does not affect the awarding of performance-based Educational Choice (Ed Choice) scholarships for the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 school years. An emergency clause was attached to the bill. (Effective Jan. 13, 2021)
Testing
HB 409 -- The bill exempts schools from retaining a student under the Third-Grade Reading Guarantee based solely on the student’s academic performance in reading, unless the student’s principal and reading teacher determine the student is not reading at grade level and is not prepared for fourth grade. This provision applies to students attending chartered nonpublic schools with an Educational Choice or Cleveland scholarship. (Effective date/please see above)
HB 436 -- This legislation primarily addresses dyslexia screening and Intervention for students enrolled in public schools. An amendment was adopted onto the bill clarifying that students who participate in state-sponsored scholarship programs can be administered alternative assessments in lieu of state tests in grades 3-8.
Repealed is the provision in the Revised Code requiring students on Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarships to take state tests.
The amendment clarifies that a student who participates in the state scholarship programs is exempt from the state achievement assessments for the purpose of renewing the scholarship if one of the following applies:
· the student has a disability and is excused from the achievement assessment requirements under federal law, the student’s individualized educational program, or a plan adopted by the chartered nonpublic school that the student attends;
· the chartered nonpublic school that the student attends has received a waiver from administering assessments to all of its students because it meets specified criteria;
· the student is in grades 3-8 and takes an alternative assessment approved by the Department;
· the student is not required to take the ACT or SAT due to a significant cognitive or intellectual disability.
(Effective April 9, 2021)
Note – Continuing law: chartered nonpublic school students in grades 9-12 can fulfill testing requirements for graduation by taking an alternative assessment approved by the ODE in lieu of a state test. High school students on state sponsored scholarships can satisfy testing requirements by taking an approved alternative assessment.
Requirements for Substitute Teachers
HB409 -- Permits a public or chartered nonpublic school to employ as a substitute teacher, for the remainder of the 2020/2021 school year only, and in accordance with the district’s or school’s own educational requirements, an individual who does not hold a post-secondary degree. Under HB 409, the State Board of Education must issue a temporary substitute teaching license to the person, provided the person satisfies other requirements of statutory law and administrative rules. An emergency clause is attached to the bill. (Effective date/please see above)
School Safety
HB 123 – This legislation transfers to the Director of Public Safety (from the State Board of Education) the responsibility to adopt rules pertaining to Emergency Management Plans.
· School Threat Assessment Plans-- The bill requires each school building administrator to incorporate into the school building’s existing emergency management plan (1) a school threat assessment plan and (2) a protocol for the building’s threat assessment team. It also requires that no later than 2 years after the bill’s effective date, the Department of Public Safety, in consultation with ODE and the Attorney General, develop a model threat assessment plan that schools may utilize.
Note – Continuing law: chartered nonpublic schools must complete Emergency Management Plans and be eligible for School Safety Training Grants.
· Suicide Awareness and Prevention – The bill adds to the Health Education requirements in RC3313.60, a requirement for each school serving students in grades 6-12 to provide annual instruction (one hour or one standard class period per year) in each of the following: (1) suicide awareness and prevention, (2) safety training and violence prevention, (3) social inclusion. These requirements are effective beginning with the next school year that begins at least 2 year’s after the bill’s effective date. The law is silent on the content of this instruction.
A student shall be excused from taking instruction in any/all of these three areas upon written request of the student’s parent or guardian.
(Effective March 24, 2021)
Note -- Chartered nonpublic schools are not specified as exempt from RC 3313.60, a section of code covered by Ohio’s Operating Standards.
School Health
HB 231 – The bill authorizes both public and chartered nonpublic schools to procure a supply of injectable or nasally administered glucagon without a license for use in emergency situations for individuals with diabetes. Schools are permitted to receive donations of injectable and nasally administered glucagon from drug manufacturers and wholesale distributors and to receive donations for this purpose. The school is required to adopt a policy authorizing the maintenance and use of glucagon and must consult with a licensed health provider (one who can prescribe drugs) in developing this policy. The bill also requires the school to report to the ODE each procurement and each occurrence in which a dose of the drug is used from its supply.
(Effective April 8, 2021)
Whatever Happened to...?:
HB 305/SB 376 – (school funding issues) -- Both bills address adequacy and equity in funding, primarily for public education. However, the legislation discontinued deductions for scholarship programs (traditional Ed Choice & JPSNSP) from the state’s share of district funding and provided new foundation funding in the state budget. In addition, funding for bus transportation was significantly increased. Both bills died at the end of the 133rd General Assembly. However, the bills are expected to be introduced in the 134th General Assembly.
HB 310 – (consequences for harassment, intimidation, or bullying) – This legislation favorably passed in the House, but stalled in the Senate. It required school districts, community schools, and STEM schools to adopt policies in undertaking disciplinary action against a student who commits an offense of harassment, intimidation, or bullying. It also required chartered nonpublic schools to adopt a policy addressing harassment, intimidation, or bullying, submit the policy to the Department of Education and post it on the school’s website if the school has a code of conduct on the website. The bill died at the end of the 133rd General Assembly.
HB342 (financial literacy) -- This legislation did not pass favorably during the lame duck session. It specified that, beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, each public school and chartered nonpublic school must require an individual to have an educator license validation in financial literacy to provide the one-half unit of instruction in financial literacy.
SB 350 (bus transportation) -- This bill did not pass during the lame duck session. It required the ODE to deduct from the district’s payment for student transportation the total daily amount of that payment for each day the district is not in compliance with state requirements.
01/14/2021
Some Inspiration this COVID-19 School Year
For an inspiring reflection, read Partnership Schools leader Christian Dallavis’ blog post on viewing teachers, school leaders, parents and students this year as “reluctant prophets,” and the grace and beauty in their witness.
“What these teachers and parents have in common, with each other and with Jonah, Simon, Andrew, James, and John, is that they have all shown up.” http://www.partnershipnyc.org/the-grace-of-yes