After over a 3 hour delay, the U.S. House at 7:21 PM voted 359 to 64 to approve the Conference Committee Report on S. 1177. All Democrats voting voted YES. You can get the vote at house.gov "Floor Proceedings" - Roll no. 664.
NOW S. 1177 MOVES TO THE U.S. SENATE. We need to call both of our U.S. Senators from each of our States and begin to teach staffers about Pay for Success.
We were able to educate the staff of many Representatives on Pay for Success as most were simply not aware of it. One Committee staffer who had actually worked on the Pay for Success language in S. 1177 finally admitted she had worked to keep Pay for Success out of the bill.
Most Committee staffers (whose job it is to defend the bill) were telling other staff that Pay for Success did NOT have anything to do with special education, that IDEA would have to be changed, that the definition of Pay for Success in S. 1177 would prevent another Utah, etc. NONE OF THAT IS TRUE BUT IT KEPT SOME REPRESENTATIVES FROM MENTIONING PAY FOR SUCCESS DURING DEBATE OR ONE MINUTES.
THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT ON S. 1177: (new law defining Pay for Success) PAY FOR SUCCESS INITIATIVE.
—The term ‘‘pay for success initiative’’ means a performance-based grant, contract, or cooperative agreement awarded by a public entity in which a commitment is made to pay for improved outcomes that result in social benefit and direct cost savings or cost avoidance to the public sector.
Such an initiative must include—
(1) a feasibility study on the initiative describing how the proposed intervention is based on evidence of effectiveness;
(2) a rigorous, third party evaluation that uses experimental or quasi-experimental design or other research methodologies that allow for the strongest possible causal inferences to determine whether the initiative has met its proposed outcomes;
(3) an annual, publicly available report on the progress of the initiative; and
(4) except as provided as under paragraph (2), a requirement that payments are made to the recipient of a grant contactor or cooperative agreement only when agreed upon outcomes are achieved.
Unfortunately NOTHING in this definition would have stopped what is happening in Utah and in Chicago. The Utah program was approved and implemented by a researcher at Utah State University.
As we just passed its 40th birthday, special education faces perhaps its greatest threat since the Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA), now the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), was signed into law.
The new No Child Left Behind bill, S. 1177, as reported by the Conference Committee between the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House includes the permissive use of Federal funds by States AND by local school districts FOR Pay for Success.
Funded by Goldman Sachs, Pay for Success in Utah denied special education to over 99 percent of the students that were in the early childhood Pay for Success program.
Goldman Sachs has received a first payment of over $250,000 based on over 99 percent of students NOT being identified for special education.
Based on these results, Goldman Sachs may receive an over 100 percent return on its investment as it will receive yearly payments based on students continuing to NOT be identified for special education (multiple yearly payments for one student).
If special education is reduced to less than 1 percent of students, for all practical purposes it will cease to exist.
Goldman Sachs has also funded a Pay for Success program for the Chicago Public Schools based on paying Goldman $9,100 for each student, each year, NOT identified for special education, but results for Chicago from that program are not yet available.
Success is not the elimination of special education. Success is not failing to identify students as needing the specialized and individualized instruction required by IDEA.
We simply cannot expect the general education teacher to do it all, to know it all, and to achieve academic excellence for each and every student.
Pretending we can eliminate disability, pretending that almost every student with a disability and their parents will benefit WITHOUT the legal rights of IDEA which are only granted when a student is identified for special education, is to turn us back over 40 years to the time before we had State laws and then the Federal law requiring special education for each and every student with a disability.
On December 2, the Illinois Alliance of Administrators of Special Education (IAASE) sent its members an email stating:
"Pay for Success as it currently exists in one other state will not be an allowed.
"Utah used a single measure (in this situation, the number of students who did not need special education after receiving early intervention services) to determine the success or failure of a program.
"The law will require the use of multiple measures of student success to determine if a funded program has been effective."
Unfortunately there is NOTHING in S. 1177 that would prevent any other school district from doing what has happened in Utah (the Utah process was approved and implemented by a researcher at Utah State University).
In my reading of the entire 1,059 page bill, there is NOTHING in S. 1177 requiring "multiple measures of student success".
IAASE (as do other special ed administrators) endorses Pay for Success:"When implemented correctly, initiatives like Pay for Success could highlight outstanding and innovative programs that are evidence-based and that have helped to prevent students from falling behind."
"Students with disabilities deserve to have programming that has been shown to be effective in improving student achievement and this portion of the bill has the potential to create a new funding stream for such programs."
NOW S. 1177 MOVES TO THE U.S. SENATE. We need to call both of our U.S. Senators from each of our States and begin to teach staffers about Pay for Success.
We were able to educate the staff of many Representatives on Pay for Success as most were simply not aware of it. One Committee staffer who had actually worked on the Pay for Success language in S. 1177 finally admitted she had worked to keep Pay for Success out of the bill.
Most Committee staffers (whose job it is to defend the bill) were telling other staff that Pay for Success did NOT have anything to do with special education, that IDEA would have to be changed, that the definition of Pay for Success in S. 1177 would prevent another Utah, etc. NONE OF THAT IS TRUE BUT IT KEPT SOME REPRESENTATIVES FROM MENTIONING PAY FOR SUCCESS DURING DEBATE OR ONE MINUTES.
THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT ON S. 1177: (new law defining Pay for Success) PAY FOR SUCCESS INITIATIVE.
—The term ‘‘pay for success initiative’’ means a performance-based grant, contract, or cooperative agreement awarded by a public entity in which a commitment is made to pay for improved outcomes that result in social benefit and direct cost savings or cost avoidance to the public sector.
Such an initiative must include—
(1) a feasibility study on the initiative describing how the proposed intervention is based on evidence of effectiveness;
(2) a rigorous, third party evaluation that uses experimental or quasi-experimental design or other research methodologies that allow for the strongest possible causal inferences to determine whether the initiative has met its proposed outcomes;
(3) an annual, publicly available report on the progress of the initiative; and
(4) except as provided as under paragraph (2), a requirement that payments are made to the recipient of a grant contactor or cooperative agreement only when agreed upon outcomes are achieved.
Unfortunately NOTHING in this definition would have stopped what is happening in Utah and in Chicago. The Utah program was approved and implemented by a researcher at Utah State University.
As we just passed its 40th birthday, special education faces perhaps its greatest threat since the Education of the Handicapped Act (EHA), now the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), was signed into law.
The new No Child Left Behind bill, S. 1177, as reported by the Conference Committee between the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House includes the permissive use of Federal funds by States AND by local school districts FOR Pay for Success.
Funded by Goldman Sachs, Pay for Success in Utah denied special education to over 99 percent of the students that were in the early childhood Pay for Success program.
Goldman Sachs has received a first payment of over $250,000 based on over 99 percent of students NOT being identified for special education.
Based on these results, Goldman Sachs may receive an over 100 percent return on its investment as it will receive yearly payments based on students continuing to NOT be identified for special education (multiple yearly payments for one student).
If special education is reduced to less than 1 percent of students, for all practical purposes it will cease to exist.
Goldman Sachs has also funded a Pay for Success program for the Chicago Public Schools based on paying Goldman $9,100 for each student, each year, NOT identified for special education, but results for Chicago from that program are not yet available.
Success is not the elimination of special education. Success is not failing to identify students as needing the specialized and individualized instruction required by IDEA.
We simply cannot expect the general education teacher to do it all, to know it all, and to achieve academic excellence for each and every student.
Pretending we can eliminate disability, pretending that almost every student with a disability and their parents will benefit WITHOUT the legal rights of IDEA which are only granted when a student is identified for special education, is to turn us back over 40 years to the time before we had State laws and then the Federal law requiring special education for each and every student with a disability.
On December 2, the Illinois Alliance of Administrators of Special Education (IAASE) sent its members an email stating:
"Pay for Success as it currently exists in one other state will not be an allowed.
"Utah used a single measure (in this situation, the number of students who did not need special education after receiving early intervention services) to determine the success or failure of a program.
"The law will require the use of multiple measures of student success to determine if a funded program has been effective."
Unfortunately there is NOTHING in S. 1177 that would prevent any other school district from doing what has happened in Utah (the Utah process was approved and implemented by a researcher at Utah State University).
In my reading of the entire 1,059 page bill, there is NOTHING in S. 1177 requiring "multiple measures of student success".
IAASE (as do other special ed administrators) endorses Pay for Success:"When implemented correctly, initiatives like Pay for Success could highlight outstanding and innovative programs that are evidence-based and that have helped to prevent students from falling behind."
"Students with disabilities deserve to have programming that has been shown to be effective in improving student achievement and this portion of the bill has the potential to create a new funding stream for such programs."
Of course there is NO data to support that Pay for Success is "effective in improving student achievement" or that Pay for Success is an "outstanding and innovative program" that is "evidence-based" or "helped to prevent students from falling behind."
WHICH NATIONAL DISABILITY AND SPECIAL EDUCATION GROUPS ENDORSED S. 1177?
Over 100 national organizations are member of CCD. Please see below what appears to be the statement of the members of CCD, but is in fact only the statement of the 5 people who signed the letter. CCD used to require that each individual organization sign on or not sign on to any CCD position, and ONLY those that signed on would be listed in any letter or communication from CCD.
December 1, 2015 (on CCD letterhead)
The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is writing to thank you for your leadership and significant efforts to assure students with disabilities are fully included in S. 1177, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).
We believe the ESSA makes important strides to support all students in having the opportunity to receive a quality education.
On behalf of the six million students with disabilities attending public school across the nation we write to support final passage of the bill.
CCD recognizes that the ESSA is the result of many compromises. As such, we urge you to remain diligent in your efforts to support the funding and regulatory processes necessary to ensure schools can follow through on the promise of ESSA which is: ‘to provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.’
As we all know and agree, every student with a disability deserves this opportunity.
CCD thanks you for your commitment to ensuring federal law continues to provide meaningful access to rigorous standards for all students and fully includes students with disabilities in state assessment and accountability systems.
[signed by 5 people representing Easter Seals, National Center for Learning Disabilities, Association of University Centers for Disability, Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, and National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities]
~Beverley Holden Johns
