Division of the Budget
Landon State Office Building Phone: (785) 296-2436
900 SW Jackson Street, Room 504 adam.c.proffitt@ks.gov
Topeka, KS 66612 http://budget.kansas.gov
Adam C. Proffitt, Director Laura Kelly, Governor
Division of the Budget
February 7, 2024
The Honorable Kristey Williams, Chairperson
House Committee on K-12 Education Budget
300 SW 10th Avenue, Room 546-S
Topeka, Kansas 66612
Dear Representative Williams:
SUBJECT: Fiscal Note for HB 2650 by House Committee on K-12 Education Budget
In accordance with KSA 75-3715a, the following fiscal note concerning HB 2650 is
respectfully submitted to your committee.
HB 2650 would require each school district to establish an at-risk student accountability
plan. The plan would assist showing academic improvement in certain subgroups and students
identified as eligible for at-risk programs. The plans would be submitted to the State Board of
Education.
The bill would state that the purpose of the at-risk student accountability report would be
to: (1) demonstrate that the school is using evidenced-based instruction for at-risk students; (2)
measure longitudinal academic improvement in a quantitative manner; (3) establish quantitative
student academic goals in order to have 75.0 percent of all students achieve proficiency by 2030
by scoring a level three or level four on the state assessments for English language arts and
mathematics; and (4) ensure that at-risk education funds are expended in accordance with state
law by providing services above and beyond regular education services. The bill would outline
the requirements of the plans, including the subgroups of students.
Each school district would be required to establish a four-year quantitative academic
improvement goal for each chosen student subgroup. Each district would conduct a four-year
longitudinal academic evaluation of each student subgroup identified on its accountability plan. If
the identified subgroup meets or exceeds the quantitative academic improvement goal established
at the end of the four-year period, the school district would repeat the process for another student
subgroup. If the subgroup would not meet the goals, the State Board of Education would deem
the school district as not meeting at-risk improvement requirements until the subsequent subgroup The Honorable Kristey Williams, Chairperson
Page 2—HB 2650
meets the goal. The school district would be required to evaluate the longitudinal academic
performance of each student subgroup for one additional school year.
If, at the end of the one additional year, the subgroup would meet or exceed the quantitative
academic improvement goal, the school district would repeat the process for another student
subgroup and conduct a four-year longitudinal academic evaluation of the group. If the subgroup
does not meet or exceed the goal, the school district would continue to make efforts for each
subgroup in each school year until the subgroup would meet or exceed the goal. The school district
would repeat the process for another student subgroup.
The bill would outline changes to the school finance formula if a district would fail to meet
or exceed the quantitative academic improvement goals set by the district. The bill would require
the Department of Education to reduce state aid associated with the at-risk weighting in the school
finance formula according to the formula in the bill.
Each school district would be required to submit an annual report in the form and manner
determined by the State Board of Education that would include the school district’s at-risk
accountability plan to attain student proficiency; an update on the current progress of the district’s
plan to attain proficiency and an estimation of whether the district expects to meet or exceed the
longitudinal academic improvement goals established by the district; the at-risk programs, services
and resources and the provisional at-risk educational programs that the district is using to support
student achievement; the number of students identified as eligible to receive at-risk or provisional
at-risk educational program services; the data and research the district used to determine what
programs and services are needed to implement the district’s approved at-risk program; and any
other information required by the State Board of Education.
Each district would be required to track and report annually the longitudinal performance
of students continuously receiving at-risk programs and services in the district’s approved at-risk
program. This report would include, if applicable, the data regarding state assessment scores,
English language arts proficiency results, four-year graduation rates, progress monitoring, norm-
referenced test results, criterion-based test results, individualized education program goals,
attendance, and average ACT composite scores. The State Board of Education would be required
to publish plans and reports through the link on the Department of Education’s website labeled
“accountability reports.” On or before January 31 of each year, the Department would be required
to prepare and present a summary of the reports submitted to the House Committee on K-12
Education Budget and Senate Committee on Education.
School district expenditures from a district’s At-Risk Education Plan Fund could only be
made for the following purposes: (1) at-risk educational programs that are provided above and
beyond regular educational services to students who are identified as at-risk; (2) personnel
providing educational services with district at-risk programs; (3) support for instructional
classroom personnel designed to provide training for evidence-based best practices for at-risk
educational programs; and (4) services contracted for the school district to provide applicable at-
risk educational programs.
The Honorable Kristey Williams, Chairperson
Page 3—HB 2650
The State Board of Education would be required to provide an online at-risk best practices
resource list of at-risk educational programs and services that demonstrate best practices and
provide evidence-based instruction of students receiving at-risk program services. These programs
must have been or are currently being used by school districts to provide at-risk programs and
services to students above and beyond that of a regular education. The State Board of Education
would be required to review the at-risk resource list, as necessary. “Evidence Based Instruction”
would be defined to mean a method or best practice that has shown or is likely to show that the
instruction will produce better student outcomes through four or more years of longitudinal results
at a district as evidenced by school district accountability reports.
The bill would require that to be and remain accredited, school districts would need to
comply, or be working with the State Board of Education to achieve compliance, with all
applicable federal and state statutes, rules, and regulations. Finally, the bill would prohibit the
State Board of Education from revising the curriculum standards that are in effect on July 1, 2024,
in English language arts and mathematics until 75.0 percent of all students score in performance
levels three and four, combined, on the statewide assessments by 2030.
According to the Department of Education, the fiscal effect for enactment of HB 2650
would be associated with potential State Foundation Aid reductions associated with the at-risk
weighting, as well as the administrative costs to the Department.
The bill would include a mechanism for a school district to have its State Foundation Aid
entitlement reduced if it fails to meet or exceed the quantitative academic improvement goals set
by the district. With this provision, state expenditures for State Foundation Aid associated with
the at-risk weighting has the potential to be reduced. However, any reduction would depend on
the number of districts that would fail to meet or exceed the goals set by the district. The
Department indicates the reduction in state aid expenditures cannot be estimated. The Division of
the Budget notes that any reduction of expenditures would be from the State General Fund
appropriation for State Foundation Aid.
For administrative costs, the Department estimates that it would require an additional
appropriation from the State General Fund totaling $252,314, including 3.00 FTE positions in FY
2025. This estimate includes 1.00 FTE position in the agency’s Administration Program (School
Finance) at a cost of $72,216 for salaries and wages (including fringe benefits), and $3,500 for
other operating expenditures, including computers, rent, office equipment, and supplies. Also
included in the estimate is 2.00 FTE positions in the Standards and Assessments Services Program
to oversee school district plans, compliance, and the maintenance and updating of the approved at-
risk program list. This estimate includes salaries and wages of $82,958 for 1.00 FTE Coordinator
position and $84,140 for 1.00 FTE Education Program Consultant position. Both estimates include
fringe benefits for the positions. For both of these positions, the Department estimates other
operating expenditures totaling $9,500, including rent, office equipment, and supplies. The
Department notes that these administrative expenses would be ongoing after FY 2025 and would
be similar in cost in future years. Any fiscal effect associated with HB 2650 is not reflected in The
FY 2025 Governor’s Budget Report.
The Honorable Kristey Williams, Chairperson
Page 4—HB 2650
The Division of the Budget notes that the enactment of the bill likely would increase
administrative costs for school districts. However, a fiscal effect for school districts cannot be
estimated.
Sincerely,
Adam C. Proffitt
Director of the Budget
cc: Gabrielle Hull, Department of Education
Angie Stallbaumer, Kansas Association of School Boards