Missouri Senate Bill SB681 Introduced / Fiscal Note

                    COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH
OVERSIGHT DIVISION
FISCAL NOTE
L.R. No.:4133S.12S Bill No.:CCS for HCS for SS for SCS SBs 681 & 662  Subject:Education, Elementary And Secondary, Elementary And Secondary Education, 
Department Of, Buses, Children And Minors, 
Type:Original  Date:May 6, 2022Bill Summary:Modifies provisions to elementary and secondary education. 
FISCAL SUMMARY
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUNDFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025
General Revenue
($2,103,815) to 
Could exceed 
($38,065,452)
($66,620,923) to 
Could exceed 
($106,883,089)
($6,061,045) to 
Could exceed 
($46,324,839)
Total Estimated Net Effect 
on General Revenue
($2,103,815) to 
Could exceed 
($38,065,452)
($66,620,923) to 
Could exceed 
($106,883,089)
($6,061,045) to 
Could exceed 
($46,324,839)
Oversight was unable to send out this conference committee substitute, receive agency 
responses, or perform an analysis of changes in this version due to the short fiscal note request 
time. Oversight has presented this fiscal, note on the best current information that we have or on 
prior year information regarding a similar bill. Upon the receipt of agency responses, Oversight 
will review to determine if an updated fiscal note should be prepared and seek the necessary 
approval to publish a new fiscal note. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 2 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Budget Stabilization Fund($27,000,000)$0 or (Unknown)$0 or (Unknown)School Safety Program 
Fund$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Evidence-Based Reading 
Instruction Program Fund*$0$0$0Lottery Fund
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
High Need Fund*$0$0$0Parent Public School 
Choice Fund*$0$0$0
Criminal Record System 
Fund
Up to 
($165,000)
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
Excellence in Education 
Revolving Fund*$0$0$0
Career Ladder Forward 
Funding Fund*$0$0$0
College & University Funds$0 or (Unknown)$0$0Workforce Diploma Fund*$0$0$0Imagination Library of 
Missouri Program Fund*$0$0$0
Total Estimated Net Effect 
on Other State Funds
(Could exceed 
$27,173,416)
(Could exceed 
$8,416)
(Could exceed 
$8,416) 
*Transfers in and distributions net to zero.
 Numbers within parentheses: () indicate costs or losses. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 3 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Federal*$0 or ($22,300)$0$0Total Estimated Net 
Effect on All Federal 
Funds
$0 or ($22,300)$0$0
*Includes Income and expenses (of approximately $65,000) that net to zero.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)FUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025General Revenue5 FTE to could exceed 
7.12 FTE
6 FTE to could exceed 
10.12 FTE 
6 FTE to could exceed 
10.12 FTE
Federal Funds 0 to .88 FTE0 to .88 FTE0 to .88 FTETotal Estimated Net 
Effect on FTE5 to 8 FTE6 to 11 FTE6 to 11 FTE
☒ Estimated Net Effect (expenditures or reduced revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any  
     of the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
☐ Estimated Net Effect (savings or increased revenues) expected to exceed $250,000 in any of
     the three fiscal years after implementation of the act or at full implementation of the act.
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDSFUND AFFECTEDFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025
Local Government
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
FISCAL ANALYSIS
ASSUMPTION
Section 9.308 - Counselor’s Week L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 4 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to the previous version, officials from the Department of Elementary and 
Secondary Education (DESE)
organization. 
In response to a similar provision, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Office of 
Administration (OA) assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
Oversight notes that the above mentioned agencies have stated the provision would not have a 
direct fiscal impact on their organization.  Oversight does not have any information to the 
contrary.  Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact on the fiscal note these agencies for this 
provision.
Section 9.138 - STEM Week (HA10)
Oversight assumes there will not be an impact from this provision.
Section 37.850 - Accountability Portal
In response to a similar provision, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials  from the Office of 
Administration – Division of Accounting (OA) stated due to the scope of the added reporting 
requirements it is estimated that an additional 1 to 3 staff would be needed. The salary and 
fringes for one intermediate accountant annually would be $61,155.  For 3 staff, the salary and 
fringe amount would be $183,465.  
Oversight assumes OA is provided with core funding to handle a certain amount of activity each 
year. Oversight assumes OA could absorb some of the costs related to this provision, therefore, 
Oversight will reflect 1 FTE as estimated by OA.
In addition, officials from the Office of Administration – Information Technology (ITSD) 
stated this legislation would require 172.80 hours of programing changes at $95 per hour for a 
total of $16,416 in FY 2023 and on-going support of $3,365 in FY 2024 and $3,449 in FY 2025 
to implement the changes in this provision.
Oversight notes ITSD assumes that every new IT project/system will be bid out because all their 
resources are at full capacity. For this bill, ITSD assumes they will contract out the programming 
changes needed for the Missouri Accountability Portal. ITSD estimates the project would take 
172.80 hours at a contract rate of $95 for a total cost of $16,416 in FY 2023.  Oversight notes 
that an average salary for a current IT Specialist within ITSD is approximately $54,641, which 
totals roughly $85,000 per year when fringe benefits are added. Assuming that all ITSD 
resources are at full capacity, Oversight assumes ITSD may (instead of contracting out the 
programming) hire an additional IT Specialist to perform the work required from this bill; 
however, for fiscal note purposes, Oversight will reflect the ITSD estimated cost of $16,416 in 
FY 2023 and on-going support of $3,365 in FY 2024 and $3,449 in FY 2025. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 5 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar provision, HB 2359 (2022), officials from the Gordon Parks 
Elementary Charter School stated the provision would have a negative fiscal impact to the 
district.
Oversight assumes this provision expands the information already made accessible on the 
Missouri Accountability Portal and will now require public school districts to provide that 
information to the Office of Administration.
Oversight assumes this provision could create a fiscal impact to local school districts as it could 
increase staff and resources to prepare and enter data into the Missouri Accountability Portal and 
therefore, Oversight will reflect a $0 to an unknown cost to local school districts.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2359 (2022), officials from the City of O’Fallon estimated 
the provision to have a fiscal impact of under $100,000. There would be a fiscal impact if an 
employee has to compile information and upload it into the accountability portal. The exact 
impact cannot be estimated unless it is known how often and what information is requested.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2359 (2022), officials from the City of St. Louis assumed 
the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organizations.  
Oversight assumes municipalities and/or counties are currently required to make expenditures 
publically accessible through the Missouri Local Government Expenditure Database.  Oversight 
assumes this provision expands the information currently made available to include any form of 
compensation or benefit made to municipal or county employees. Oversight assumes the 
additional information required to report exists and collecting it can be absorbed within 
municipality and/or county current resources.
Section 160.067 - ARPA Report (as amended by HSA1 to HA4)
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE stated the proposed language states 
“Any school district with more than six thousand students that receives moneys under the federal 
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 shall submit a report to the state board of education before 
July first following each year such moneys are received.” It also states that any report submitted 
under this section will be made publicly available on the department’s website. 
DESE estimated an approximate minimum cost of $40,000 to develop and maintain a new 
MOSIS data collection.  
 
Section 160.261 Discipline & Abuse Procedures L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 6 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization.  
In response to the previous version, officials from from Department of Social Services (DSS) - 
Division of Youth Services stated the Children’s Division may need additional investigators to 
investigate allegations in schools.  The Department estimates a need of 0 – 2 staff for this 
workload.
Oversight will show a range of impact to DSS of $0 (no additional investigators needed) to a 
cost of two investigators. Per DSS, the cost of the FTE will be split between General Revenue 
(56%) and Federal Funds (44%). 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2095 (2022), officials from the Phelps County Sheriff, 
Kansas City Police DepartmentSt. Louis County Police Department each assumed 
the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
Section 160.516 - Curriculum Review
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE stated the proposed language in this 
section requires the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to develop a model 
policy (§160.516.4) for curriculum development and review for local school boards to adopt and 
follow. The department estimates two annual meetings would be needed to discuss and develop 
this model policy. Individuals would include:

from each Regional Professional Development Centers (RPDC) regions (4 x 9 = 36) – 13 
teachers from each designation (urban, suburban, rural)

Centers) from MOASSP / MCCTA (principals/CTE professional organization) 
representing rural, suburban, urban (3 designations x 4 levels)

The estimated cost of these annual meetings is $56,865.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1908 (2022), officials from the Sedalia School District 
200 stated the legislation could have a significant fiscal impact on school districts and create an 
ongoing cost. The annual review, re-visioning, and potential recreation of curriculum on an 
ongoing basis would require a significant work load. Trying to place a cost estimate on such a 
law would greatly depend on the size of the district. The estimated annual cost to that district 
would be approximately $80,000 - $100,000.
Oversight notes if 5% of the 518 school districts in Missouri experienced a cost similar to one 
estimated by the Sedalia 200 School District, the impact is estimated at $2,080,000 (26 *  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 7 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
$80,000). Oversight will show an unknown cost to school districts/school boards to implement 
this provision. 
Sections 160.560 Show Me Success Diploma Program (as amended by HA5)
In response to a similar proposal, HB 624 (2021), officials from the Office of the State 
Treasurer (STO) stated they are estimating anywhere from no fiscal impact up to two FTEs.  
The overall impact to the State Treasurer’s Office will depend on negotiation with the state’s 529 
program manager to implement these provisions.  The STO assumed a possible need for two (2) 
FTE Analysts, each at $39,708 annually plus fringe benefits and other expense and equipment.  
Oversight notes that subsection 160.560.8 states the Office of the State Treasurer shall provide 
guidance and assist with the creation, maintenance, and use of an account that has been 
established under sections 166.400 to 166.455 (MOST program).
Oversight will range the fiscal impact “Up to” the 2 FTE estimated by the STO starting in FY 
2023 depending upon the activity and complexity additional accounts.
Oversight assumes this program is optional (may) for school districts. Oversight also assumes 
school districts would continue to receive state funding for students that utilize this educational 
path. Therefore, Oversight will assume the provision will not materially fiscally impact local 
school districts.
Oversight assumes if a student receives a show-me success diploma and enrolls in a 
postsecondary educational institution, the state will continue to count this student in their funding 
calculation, and this will not result in a material difference in state aid.  Therefore, Oversight will 
not reflect a fiscal impact for this provision.
Section 160.565 Extended Learning Opportunities (as amended, HA1)
In response to a previous version, officials from the DESE stated this section establishes the 
Extended Learning Opportunities Act. DESE would be required to assist students and parents in 
completing the enrollment process, developing an agreement form for each vendor that parents 
or students must sign, assisting in follow ups on those forms, assuring the student and one parent 
signs the form, determining if the parent has parental rights in place to sign such a form, etc. The 
Department estimates at least one Director FTE at a $51,288 annual salary would be required to 
comply with these requirements.
The section also requires the development of a statewide policy, including criteria for provider 
approval, basis for credit acceptance and application processes, etc. DESE estimates an  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 8 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
additional fiscal impact of at least $35,000 for the policy development and modifications to the 
data collection system.
In response to a similar provision in HCS for SB 323 (2021), officials from the Sikeston R-6 
School District assumed the impact would be related to developing new learning opportunities 
for students with new partnerships.
Oversight notes this section requires, beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, the state board 
of education and each local school board to routinely inform students and their parents of the 
ability to earn credit for participating in extended learning opportunities. 
Oversight assumes there could be costs associated with informing and assisting students and 
parents who want to participate in extended learning opportunities. Oversight will show the costs 
as estimated by DESE (could exceed 1 FTE) and an unknown cost to school districts.
Section 160.665 School Protection Officer (HA6)
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HB 1481 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Public Safety - Office of the Director
and the  Missouri Highway Patrol each assumed the provision 
will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
Oversight notes that the above mentioned agencies have stated the provision would not have a 
direct fiscal impact on their organization.  Oversight does not have any information to the 
contrary.  Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact on the fiscal note for this provision.
Section 160.671 - School Safety Program (HA18)
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2878 (2022), officials from Office of Administration - 
Budget and Planning state section 160.671.2 creates in the state treasury the “School Safety 
Program Fund.” To the extent new appropriations are made from GR, resources otherwise 
available for other budget priorities might be reduced. This provision may impact the calculation 
under Article X, Section 18(e).
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2878 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Revenue, Department of Public 
Safety - Missouri Gaming Commission and the Office of the State Treasurer
the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations.  
Oversight notes this program is subject appropriation; therefore, Oversight will show a range of 
impact to General Revenue of $0 (no appropriation) to an unknown cost transferring to the 
School Safety Program Fund. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 9 of 
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this provision creates the School Safety Program Fund. For simplicity, 
Oversight will assume all funds will be distributed to school districts in the year in each they 
were received. 
Sections 160.2700 & 160.2705 - Adult High Schools
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE and DSS each assumed the 
provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
Oversight notes that the above mentioned agencies have stated the provision would not have a 
direct fiscal impact on their organization.  Oversight does not have any information to the 
contrary.  Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact on the fiscal note for this provision.
Section 161.097 - Missouri Advisory Board for Educator Preparation (as amended by HAS 4)
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE estimated a one-time meeting cost to 
align literacy and reading instruction in teacher preparation programs at $40,140. 
Section 161.214 School Innovation Waiver
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. 
Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for this agency for this 
provision.
Oversight notes DESE’s FY 2022 Budget Book included a $1,000,000 Governor’s 
Recommendation from General Revenue to “support school innovation teams in implementing 
their waivers approved by the State Board of Education”. DESE’s FY 2023 Budget Book does 
not appear to include funding to support innovation waivers.
Oversight will show a range of impact to General Revenue of $0 (no additional cost or not 
appropriated) to an unknown cost to support school innovation teams. Based on FY 2022’s 
Governor Recommend, Oversight assumes the cost could exceed $250,000. 
Oversight assumes there could be a cost to implement this program. School districts may have 
costs related to improving student readiness and job training, increasing teacher compensation, or 
improving teacher recruitment and development. Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 
(no school districts participate or no additional cost) to an unknown cost to implement the 
waiver. Oversight assumes the net impact on school districts would be $0 if distributions from 
General Revenue cover all costs or negative net impact if implementation costs exceed state 
distributions.
Section 161.241 Statewide Literacy Plan L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 10 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE stated Section 161.241 requires DESE 
to create an Office of Literacy to coordinate staff with roles relating to literacy and align staff 
work around supporting best practices in reading instruction. DESE assumes that one (1) FTE 
Coordinator of Literacy would be required as part of this new office at a cost of $63,480.  
This section also requires DESE to recruit and employ quality teacher trainers with expertise in 
reading instruction. Because this is subject to appropriation DESE estimates a cost that could 
exceed a cost that could greatly exceed $100,000. This would be subject to appropriation so 
DESE will show the costs as $0 – Could Exceed $100,000. This could be funded by the proposed 
creation of the “Evidence-Based Reading Instruction Program Fund."
Oversight assumes this provision creates the Evidence-Based Reading Instruction Program 
Fund. The fund shall consist of moneys appropriated by the General Assembly or from gifts, 
bequests or donations. Funds are to be distributed to school districts to reimburse school districts 
and charter schools for efforts to improve literacy. For simplicity, Oversight assumes on the 
money in the Fund will be used within the year it is received. 
Per the SS SCS HCS HB 3002 (2022), Oversight notes there is an appropriation from the 
Budget Stabilization Fund (0522) to the Evidence-based Reading Instruction Program Fund for 
$25,000,000 for FY 2023. Oversight will show a $0 to unknown impact in the remaining years. 
In addition, Oversight will show a $0 to unknown cost to General Revenue for FY 2024, FY 
2025 and beyond for potential future appropriations.
161.380, 161.385 & 162.1255 Competency Based Education (as amended by HA5)
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1956 (2022), officials from Department of Elementary 
and Secondary Education (DESE) stated this provision requires DESE to facilitate the 
creation, sharing, and development of assessments and curriculum and training for teachers, and 
best practices for the school districts that offer competency-based education courses. Costs for 
development of competency-based assessments will vary depending upon the number of 
courses/content domains necessary. The department estimates $1,000,000 costs* for each 
course/content domain. The department has projected these costs across two fiscal years along 
with $25,000 annually for the Competency Task Force support until the work is complete.
*This includes: $100,000 for test specifications/blueprint review, $50,000 for passage review, 
$100,000 for item writing, $100,000 for item review, $100,000 for forms creation, $300,000 for 
field testing, and $300,000 for establishing mastery standards. 
DESE projects Section 162.1255.2 may have additional costs to school districts/charter schools 
and to the vendors they used to determine and report the appropriate attendance hours to DESE. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 11 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1956 (2022), officials from the Office of the Governor 
and the  each assumed the provision would have no fiscal 
impact on their respective organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the 
contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1956 (2022), officials from the Missouri Senate stated 
they anticipated a negative fiscal impact to reimburse 2 Senators for travel to Task Force 
meetings. It will cost approximately $256 per meeting. 
 
Oversight assumes the General Assembly could absorb the cost of the Task Force meetings 
within the current appropriation levels and will not reflect a fiscal impact.
Oversight assumes there could be costs to implement Competency-based Education programs in 
school districts and charter schools such as costs determine and report the appropriate attendance 
hours to DESE.
Oversight assumes this provision creates the Competency-Based Education Grant Program 
Fund. The fund shall consist of moneys appropriated by the General Assembly or from gifts, 
bequests or donations. For simplicity, Oversight assumes on the money in the Fund will be used 
within the year it is received. 
Per the SS SCS HCS HB 3002 (2022), Oversight notes an appropriation from the Budget 
Stabilization Fund (0522) to the Competency-Based Education Grant Program Fund for 
$2,000,000 for FY 2023. Oversight will show a $0 to unknown impact in the remaining years. 
In addition, Oversight will show a $0 to unknown impact to General Revenue for FY 2024 and 
FY 2025 and beyond. 
Section 161.700 - Holocaust Education (as amended by HA1 to HA11)
In response to a similar proposal, SCS HCS HB 2000 (2022), officials from DESE stated they 
would incur meeting costs in the amount of $22,300 for curriculum development and 
implementation. In addition, DESE will incur meeting costs in the amount of $66,900 for teacher 
professional development and framework implementation.
In response to a similar proposal, officials from Southeast Missouri State University, a charter 
school sponsor, stated many schools do not even address the Holocaust. 
Oversight assumes DESE is to create a curriculum on the Holocaust for school districts 
participating in the pilot program to adopt beginning in the 2023-24 school year. School districts 
shall provide professional development for teachers related to Holocaust instruction. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 12 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes teachers are already required to obtain a certain number of hours towards 
professional development. 
Oversight does not anticipate a fiscal impact to school districts.  
Section 161.854 - Changes to Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) (as amended by HA9)
Oversight assumes House Amendment 9 removes section 161.854. 
Section 161.1050 - Trauma Informed Schools
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1836 (2022), officials from the DESE, Department of 
Mental Health and the DSS each assumed the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their 
respective organizations.  
In response to a similar proposal, HB 743 (2021), officials from the Springfield Public Schools
estimated this provision could cost $5,000 if the district participates.  
In response to a similar proposal, HB 743 (2021), officials from the High Point R-III School 
District assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
Oversight notes the Springfield Public Schools indicated there could be costs associated with 
implementing this proposal. Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (no schools participate 
or the additional requirements can be absorbed) to an unknown cost.
Section 162.005 - School Board Meetings (HA12)
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2575 (2022), officials from DESE stated this 
legislation requires the Department to withhold funds from school districts that are found in 
violation of the requirements of this section. If the violation is not corrected during the school 
year in which the withhold occurred, the withheld amounts are not allowed to be returned to the 
school district. This could result in a cost avoidance for the state as those funds appropriated for 
schools in violation may not be expended. DESE has no way to determine what districts may 
violates the section and not come in compliance with the section in the same school year. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2575 (2022), officials from the Sikeston R-6 School 
District assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization.  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 13 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2575 (2022), officials from the Gordon Parks 
Elementary Charter School stated there would be an impact to their organization but did not 
provide any further information.
Oversight notes, if a court finds that a school district fails to comply with this provision, DESE 
is to withhold all moneys provided by the monthly distribution of state formula funding to the 
district. Oversight will show a potential loss to school districts who fail to comply and a gain in 
revenue for General Revenue. Oversight is uncertain how many school districts would be non-
compliant but assumes the funding withheld from school districts could possibly exceed 
$250,000 depending on the number of districts that are not in compliance. 
Oversight assumes any funding withheld for non-compliance shall be released to the school 
district if the school district establishes compliance within the school year during which DESE 
withheld monies. Oversight assumes the combined effect would range from $0 (no funding 
withheld or funding returned) to an unknown gain to General Revenue. 
Oversight assumes the combined impact for school districts would be $0 (no funding withheld 
or funding returned) to an unknown loss to school districts if a school district does not establish 
compliance.
Oversight notes the foundation formula payments for school districts is estimated at 
$3,561,737,794 for FY 2023 per the DESE Budget Request for FY 2023.
In addition Oversight assumes there could be legal costs for districts if parents bring a civil 
action for injunctive relief against the district.
Section 162.058 Community Engagement Policy
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the OA assumed the 
provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization.  
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1750 (2022), officials from the Office of the State Courts 
Administrator assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization.  
Oversight is uncertain if there would be additional costs to school boards/school districts but 
assumes there could be additional costs to implement community engagement policies and 
allowing residents to submit items to be placed on the agenda of a school board meeting 
(depending on the number of agenda items that are submitted to the board). Oversight will show 
a range of impact $0 (no agenda items submitted or no material additional costs stemming from  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 14 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
the agenda items or implementation of community engagement policies) to unknown costs for 
school boards/school districts.
Section 162.084 - Notification (as amended HAS 4)
In response to a similar proposal, HB 942 (2021), officials from the Springfield School District 
assumed a cost for the notification process, goals process – assuming 10% unaccredited and 25 
provisionally accredited – costing $50,000.
Oversight assumes there could costs associated with notifying parents of performance scores 
and academic proficiency and growth goals. 
Sections 162.261, 162.281, 162.291, 162.471, 162.481, 162.491 and 162.563 - Subdistricts
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1804 (2022), officials from the Office of the State Courts 
Administrator assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
 In response to the previous version, officials from the St. Louis County Election Board stated 
it would take their office 15 hours per subdistrict that they would have to draw. With that in 
mind, they estimate that they would have to draw 161 subdistricts for the 23 impacted school 
districts. This would entail 2,415 hours of programming at a cost of $24.00 per hour for a total of 
$57,960.
Oversight assumes there could be costs for local election authorities to draw sub-district 
boundaries. Oversight assumes this provision is permissive; therefore, Oversight will show a 
range of impact of $0 (no school districts choose to subdivide) to an unknown cost for local 
election authorities for school districts that choose to subdivide.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 164 (2021), officials from the Affton 101 School District, 
Fordland R-III School District and the Marquand-Zion R-VI School District each assumed 
this provision would have a fiscal impact on their respective organizations. However, these 
school districts did not provide any further information regarding the impact.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 164 (2021), officials from the High Point R-III School 
District and the Malta Bend R-V School District each assumed the provision would have no 
fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
Oversight requested additional information from the responding school districts; however, no 
additional information was received. Based on the information available at the time this fiscal  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 15 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
note was completed, Oversight assumes there is no fiscal impact to these school districts for 
these sections.  
Section 162.720 - Gifted Education
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 1750 (2022), officials from Sikeston R-6 
School District assumed the provision will have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 306 (2021), officials from the High Point R-III School 
District assumed the provision would not fiscally impact their schools.
In response to a similar proposal, from 2021 (SB 151), officials from the Fordland School 
District stated this would require additional funding to establish a gifted program.
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (SB 645), officials from the Hurley R-I School 
District stated gifted programs are very expensive to run and for small school districts, the 
financial impact of creating sections for 3 or 4 students could be massive at varying grade levels.
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (SB 645), officials from the Shell Knob School 
District assumed this provision has a negative fiscal impact.
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (SB 645), officials from the Fayette R-III school 
district said the annual cost of this provision is $50,000, and would increase each year. It would 
be the cost to hire a gifted teacher plus any required assessments.
In response to a similar proposal from 2019, (HB 112), officials from the Wellsville-
Middletown R-1 School District assumed the provision had the potential to have a substantial 
negative fiscal impact. 
In response to a similar proposal from 2019, (HB 112), officials from the Lee's Summit R-7 
School District assumed the provision would be of no cost to the district because it has a state-
approved program.
In response to a similar proposal from 2019, (HB 112), Springfield Public Schools assumed the 
cost to the district would be for additional professional development for non-certificated gifted 
teachers. The program already exists in the district but this change would create a mandate for 
districts. Additional cost above current expenditure is negligible.
Oversight notes, per information from DESE’s 2019 Gifted Advisory Council (GAC) Biennial 
Report, 239 out of 528 Missouri school districts offered gifted programs in 2018, spending  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 16 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
$42,968,610 for these programs.  Also, per the report, the state reimburses $24,870,140 annually, 
which amount has remained static since 2006.  Therefore, Oversight will assume the costs for 
this expansion will be borne by the school districts. DESE provided there were 37,475 identified 
students in Missouri, and that 5,199 identified students were unserved. However, the GAC 
reports and statistics from the National Center for Education Statistics show there are likely more 
unidentified unserved gifted students in Missouri.
Oversight estimates gifted spending is approximately $1,325 per gifted student ($42,968,610 / 
32,276). If there are 5,199 unserved identified gifted students with a cost of $1,325 to educate, 
Oversight estimates $6,888,675 to provide gifted education to every unserved identified gifted 
student.
Oversight notes that the GAC reports show that districts with gifted programs identify gifted 
students at higher rates than districts without gifted programs. Oversight does not have sufficient 
data to firmly estimate a specific number of unidentified unserved gifted students, but will create 
an instructive estimate based on national statistics.
Oversight notes that in 2014, The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) found states 
identified 6.7% of their public school students as gifted. 6.7% of Missouri’s 883,703 students is 
59,208 gifted students. To match the NCES identified gifted student population average, 
Missouri would need to identify 11,335 ((.067 x 883,703) - 5,199 identified gifted students) more 
students as gifted. Furthermore, to provide gifted services to every currently identified and 
unidentified gifted student would cost $21,907,684 ((11,335 estimated unidentified gifted 
students + 5,199 identified gifted students) x $1,325 cost per student). 
Alternately, Oversight will estimate the cost of each district establishing a gifted program. If the 
289 districts without a gifted program each hired one $50,000 a year teacher to establish a gifted 
program, this provision would have a $14,450,000 local net direct fiscal impact. Last, DESE 
recommends a maximum of 90 gifted students per full time teacher, which is a $6,000,000 direct 
fiscal impact for 120 teachers, but is likely low because that would likely require some districts 
to share a teacher. 
Section 162.961 - Burden of Proof
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE and the DSS each assumed the 
provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Office of 
Administration - Administrative Hearing Commission assumed the section would have no 
fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2010 (2022), officials from the Taneyville R-II School 
District stated that shifting the burden of proof to the school district could have a very large  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 17 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
fiscal impact on school districts. This includes increased attorney fees, increased costs for special 
education process coordination fees, not to mention every time a parent requests a one-on-one 
paraprofessional for their child. It's much harder to prove a child would not benefit from an 
individual paraprofessional - every child would benefit from this. If granted, a district is looking 
at approximately $20,000-$25,000 easily for each extra paraprofessional.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2010 (2022), officials from Republic School District 
stated because the burden of proof currently rests with the parents, it inadvertently prevents 
many due process claims from making it all the way to hearing - which is good for districts and 
for families. This is often because the process of preparing their burden of proof provides parents 
information and legal advice about whether or not the dispute should even be addressed by due 
process procedures.  In addition, bearing the burden of proof provides motivation for parents to 
participate in other alternative dispute resolution strategies prior to moving forward to hearing 
which saves money, time, and emotional capital for all parties.  
If the burden of proof is shifted to the district at the beginning of the process, many of the 
complaints parents threaten to take to due process will be taken all the way to hearing because 
parents will have no motivation to resolve the issue sooner or by way of alternative methods 
because they would bear none of the initial costs related to money, time, effort, and emotion 
which are already being incurred by the district as soon a complaint is filed.  
Regarding due process in general, everyone needs to keep in mind the following:
- Of the three formal dispute resolution procedures provided by the IDEA, due process 
hearings are the most costly in terms of time, fiscal resources, and impact on relationships 
between school personnel and parents.  
- With each due process complaint - even before the complaint is adjudicated - the district is 
forced to expend considerable school district resources which impedes the ability of school 
personnel to provide enhanced services for all students with disabilities because it devotes 
the district’s precious time and resources to fighting the legal actions of a single parent.   
This is why districts are already motivated to participate in alternate methods of dispute 
resolution.
- The average legal fees for a district involved in a due process hearing were $10,512.50. 
Districts compelled to compensate parents for their attorney’s fees averaged $19,241.38. The 
expenditures associated with the verdict of the due process hearing averaged districts 
$15,924.14. For districts that chose to settle with a parent prior to the adjudication of the due 
process hearing, the settlement costs averaged $23,827.34 (although the Council of School 
Attorneys estimates much higher average costs for all of these categories).  Their own 
district's fees were much higher than this, and the complaint was withdrawn before it even 
went to hearing.
In addition, the stress on teachers and staff who are forced to participate in due process 
complaints, hearings or litigation is significant. A 2016 AASA report cited 12% of school 
administrators who said that more than half of district special education school personnel either  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 18 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
left the district or requested a transfer out of special education after being involved in a due 
process hearing or subsequent litigation. This is an aspect of due process which is an additional 
increase in costs for the district as they are forced to recruit, hire and train replacement personnel 
in a field which is already difficult to staff.
There is considerable prep time for these legal type events and many districts employ Special 
Education legal guidance for due process hearings. This, combined with the time and attention of 
their District Special Education staff, will without a doubt increase costs for the district. Between 
staff wages and legal guidance they conservatively estimate the financial cost at $10,000 per 
occurrence. Thus, they would need to increase the Special Education budget for these events for 
each year. They would estimate increasing the budget between $25,000 and $40,000 each year as 
a result of the legislation.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2010 (2022), officials from the North Kansas City 
Schools stated they have not been involved in too many due process hearings as described and 
when they have, their insurance company has taken the lead. They do pay a $25,000 deductible 
per occasion. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2010 (2022), officials from the Dallas County R-I School 
District stated there would be a fiscal impact to a school district; however, that amount is 
unknown and would be dependant upon the unique situation each "due process" requires.  
Oversight assumes this provision shifts the burden of proof and production to school districts in 
due process hearings for children with a disability. Oversight assumes this could result in 
additional costs for school districts. Therefore, Oversight will show an unknown cost.
Section 162.974 - High Need Fund
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE assumed this provision would make 
two specific changes to current law.  Each of these changes will have impact as discussed below:
1)  The first change adds the following sentence:  "For any school district with an average daily 
attendance of five hundred students or fewer, the calculation of three times the current 
expenditure per average daily attendance shall not include any money reimbursed to a school 
district under this section."
This will result in an additional cost to the High Need Fund of $25,503.
2)  The second change adds the word "special" to section 162.974.1.
Adding the word "special" would allow DESE to deny any education costs (that are not special 
education costs) reported under the High Need Fund.  The ability to deny reimbursement of these  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 19 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
regular education costs will result in a savings to the state; however, DESE cannot calculate the 
extent of the savings.
In summary, the first change will result in an increased cost of approximately $25,503; however, 
the second change will diminish this cost by some unknown amount.
Oversight will show the impact as calculated by DESE to General Revenue and Lottery Fund 
for the first change. Additionally, Oversight will show a savings from the second change which 
allows DESE to deny reimbursement of regular education (non-special education) costs from the 
High Need Fund. The increased cost from the first change will be somewhat offset by the 
savings from the second change.
Oversight notes the High Need Fund reimburses school districts for the costs of educating 
students that exceed three times the current expenditure per average daily attendance (ADA). 
DESE assumes the provision removes the cost reimbursed by the High Need Fund from the 
calculation of current expenditure per ADA which would lower the current expenditure per ADA 
threshold and increase the potential costs eligible for reimbursement for districts with ADA of 
500 or fewer. 
Current
Cost of Student > (Current Expenditure/ADA)*3
Proposed
Cost of Student > ((Current Expenditure - High Need Fund Reimbursed Costs)/ADA)*3
Oversight notes the following regarding the High Need Fund:
High Need FundFY 2019 FY 2020FY 2021 FY 2022 Proj. Total Costs Reported$184,676,057$197,257,252$188,425,481$190,309,736Total Reimbursed$61,174,204$61,174,204$62,058,526$62,008,829Percent Reimbursed33%31%32%33%Districts Paid235242217219Students Claimed3,6373,7853,6363,672
DESE FY 2023 Budget Book
Oversight notes, per DESE’s FY 2023 budget book, the High Need Fund is funded with 
$39,946,351 from General Revenue (67%) and $19,590,000 from the Lottery Fund (33%).
Section 163.016 - Dollar Value Modifier L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 20 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE stated to calculate the impact, the 
March 2022 formula calculation for Gasconade County R-II (037-037) was calculated using the 
county they are located in that has the highest Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) which is Franklin 
County at 1.093. If the formula is fully funded then it would be an additional cost to the state of 
$1,076,986.67 per year.  If the formula is not fully funded then the additional money is going to 
be shifted from all other school districts.  
To calculate the impact, the March 2022 formula calculation for Maries County R-II (063-067) 
was calculated using the county they are located in that has the highest Dollar Value Modifier 
(DVM) which is Osage County at 1.0310.  If the formula is fully funded then it would be an 
additional cost to the state of $150,436.88 per year.  If the formula is not fully funded then the 
additional money is going to be shifted from all other school districts.  
To calculate the impact, the March 2022 formula calculation for Bismark R-V (094-076) was 
calculated using the county they are located in that has the highest Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) 
which is Washington County at 1.092. If the formula is fully funded then it would be an 
additional cost to the state of $313,513.11 per year.  If the formula is not fully funded then the 
additional money is going to be shifted from all other school districts.  
To calculate the impact, the March 2022 formula calculation for West St. Francois County (094-
087) was calculated using the county they are located in that has the highest Dollar Value 
Modifier (DVM) which is Washington County at 1.092. If the formula is fully funded then it 
would be an additional cost to the state of $624,964.84 per year.  If the formula is not fully 
funded then the additional money is going to be shifted from all other school districts.  
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HB 2493 (2022), officials from the Gasconade 
County R-II School District stated the dollar value modifier will have no impact on other 
districts as the DVM is based on the funding formula for education. However, allowing 
Gasconade County R-II to claim the Higher Dollar Value Modifier would result in a Dollar 
Value Modifier of 1.093 which adds $1,066,637.00 annually to the budget and allows the district 
to compete with their Franklin County Districts. This is important as they operate a building 
which is located in Franklin County and all Gasconade County students who attend the Gerald 
Elementary School located in Franklin County must attend middle and high school in Gasconade 
County.
Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (not appropriated) to a total cost to General 
Revenue of $2,165,902 ($1,076,987 + $150,437 + $313,513 + $624,965) as estimated by the 
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
Oversight will show a range of impact as estimated by the Department of Elementary and 
Secondary Education.
Section 163.063 - Residential Treatment Facilities (HA19) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 21 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2376 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE), Department of Mental Health, Department 
of Corrections and the Department of Social Services each assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight does not have any information to 
the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies.  
Oversight is uncertain if children in residential treatment facilities are claimed in average daily 
attendance (ADA) for purposes of distributing foundation formula dollars to school districts.
Additionally, Oversight notes the amount of state funding is district specific. It can vary from 
under $1,000 per student to over $8,000 per student, depending upon the school district. 
Oversight assumes, if this provision changes which district children in foster care are counted for 
purposes of ADA, this provision could potentially impact General Revenue and correspondingly 
school districts by an unknown amount.  
However, upon further inquiry, DESE stated this provision would not impact the foundation 
formula. Therefore, Oversight will not show an impact to the foundation formula.
Oversight assumes this provision requires school districts to “pass through to such facility at 
least eighty percent of any state or local moneys paid to the school district on a per-pupil basis 
for such child in addition to any other moneys available to the school district through the 
department of elementary and secondary education for such child.” Oversight assumes this 
would be a loss to school districts if districts are currently allowed to retain the state and local 
moneys for such children. 
Oversight notes that residential treatment facilities are private entities that contract with the state 
to provide care for children. Oversight assumes the flow of money from school districts to 
treatment facilities could potentially result in a savings to the state (if some of the contracted 
costs are covered by school district dollars). Oversight assumes that this would be an indirect 
effect of the provision. 
Section 163.161 Magnet Schools (HA1 to HA3)
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 1814 (2022), officials from DESE stated 
the changes to this section would eliminate the inefficiency penalties that a district may incur as 
a result of transporting students to a magnet school. Because the transportation payment is not 
calculated by building within a district, changes to how data is collected and a change to the 
transportation calculation system would be necessary.  DESE estimates a cost that could exceed 
$100,000 to make the necessary changes.
Section 166.700 Empowerment Scholarship Account for Home School Students (HA11) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 22 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this provision removes home school students from being eligible for 
Empowerment Scholarship Accounts. Oversight does not anticipate an impact from this 
provision.
Section 167.1200 to 167.1230 Public School Open Enrollment Act (HA1 to HA3)
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 1814 (2022), officials from DESE stated 
sections 167.1205 and 167.1210 could have a minimal impact on the foundation formula as 
students would be allowed to transfer to districts that receive more state aid per pupil. DESE is 
not able to estimate what this cost would be without knowing what students were going to 
transfer and to which districts. 
Section 167.1220 outlines requirements the process for a student to apply to attend a nonresident 
district, and the process by which a receiving district must determine whether to grant the 
request. If the resident district believes that the nonresident district is not in compliance with the 
outlined requirements, the nonresident district may submit an appeal to the Commissioner of the 
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (§167.1220.5(5), RSMo). The 
Commissioner must first attempt to mediate the dispute, and if that is unsuccessful, the 
Commissioner will conduct a hearing and take testimony from both school boards.
DESE assumes that this Chapter 536, RSMo, hearing will be conducted by a designee of the 
Commissioner. Based on this proposed language, the Office of Governmental Affairs estimates 
costs of less than $100,000. These costs which will be dependent on the number of hearing 
appeals the State Board receives from districts that are not able to be resolved through mediation, 
include but are not limited to:


settlement negotiations;

For cost explanation purposes, the average cost for a teacher discipline hearing is 
$566.55/hearing:



Section 167.1220.5(5) states that within five days of the Commissioner’s decision, a school 
board m                                                       ay appeal the first-level decision to the Missouri State 
Board of Education “as provided in state law.” DESE assumes that the intent is to conduct 
another Chapter 536, RSMo, hearing, but would note that after conducting an initial Chapter 536, 
RSMo, hearing, this matter would now appear to be eligible for review at the circuit court level 
pursuant to § 536.100, RSMo.  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 23 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
However, were DESE to conduct a second Chapter 536 RSMo, hearing, the costs listed above 
would remain, with costs dependent on the number of second-level appeals that are made to the 
State Board of Education.
Per section 167.1230.11, the process of auditing 10% of districts participating in the public 
school open enrollment has the potential to require additional FTE.  It is difficult to predict as 
DESE has no idea the number of districts will actually participate.  At minimum this would be an 
FTE Director Position and computer and monitors would be necessary.  Funding for this would 
be the “Parent Public School Choice Fund” as created in 167.1212 in this bill.  If not funded then 
DESE would assume General Revenue would be required to be used.  
Overall, new data collection mechanisms and reporting would also be needed based on the 
proposed legislation. DESE estimates two new data fields costing $10,000 each and the reporting 
on the new data collected to cost $15,000. Total one-time costs are projected to be $35,000. 
Annual maintenance costs after the first year are estimated at $3,500.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 543 (2021), officials from the Kansas City School 
District stated the cost of this bill is undeterminable until families make the election.  The cost of 
children in district moving out is greater than the cost for those receiving.  Loss of local and state 
revenue for a pupil in KC is roughly $9,000.  Loss of a child or even two or three from a 
classroom does not allow the sending district to reduce costs of teachers, transportation, etc., 
causing the revenue hit to not be balanced with reduced expenditures.  
Holding up housing inside boundaries for children who attend a neighboring district eliminates 
the opportunity for traditional and charter schools to fill seats that provide adequate trailing 
revenues.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 543 (2021), officials from the Springfield Public Schools
estimated a cost of $150,000 annually.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 543 (2021), officials from the Afton School District 
assumed the proposal would fiscally impact their school district, but did not elaborate.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 543 (2021), officials’ from Malta Bend R-V School 
District and  each assumed the provision would not fiscally 
impact their respective districts. 
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (HB 2310), officials from the Shell Knob School 
District assumed this would have a negative fiscal impact.
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (HB 2310), officials from the Wellsville- 
Middletown R-1 School District assumed this bill has the potential to have a substantial  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 24 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
negative fiscal impact on Missouri public schools.  It will make long range planning virtually 
useless if a school can't realistically predict its enrollment figures for the coming years due to the 
vagaries of this bill that would allow students to transfer with no usable notice to the districts.
Oversight notes this provision bars students from transferring until the 2023-2024 school year 
(FY 20244). Because DESE assumes the number of transfers cannot be estimated, and the 
amount of state funding is district specific (can vary from under $1,000 per student to over 
$8,000 per student, depending upon the school district), this note will reflect a potential 
(Unknown) cost (if students transfer into districts that receive more state aid) to an Unknown 
positive impact (if students generally transfer into districts that receive less state aid) for both 
general revenue and school districts. Oversight assumes that some districts would see a net 
negative direct fiscal impact, while others would see a net positive direct fiscal impact.
Oversight will reflect a $60 million appropriation from the General Revenue fund to the new 
Parent Public School Choice Fund (§167.1212) in FY 2024 (Section B states the appropriate 
sections shall become effective July 1, 2023), and being expended to the local school districts. 
For simplicity, Oversight assumes all funds will be used within the year they are received.  
Section 167.151 - Property Owner Student Transfers (HA3 and HA2 to HA3)
Oversight assumes this provision would allow any person who owns real residential or 
agricultural property and pays a school tax in any district other than the district of residence to 
send their children to a public school in the district where that persons pays such school tax.  
Oversight notes the student will count towards average daily attendance at the district of choice. 
Therefore, Oversight notes this provision allows students to transfer beginning in the 2023-2024 
school year (FY 2024). Oversight cannot estimate number of transfers and the amount of state 
funding is district-specific (can vary from under $1,000 per student to over $8,000 per student, 
depending upon the school district). Therefore, this note will reflect a potential unknown cost (if 
students transfer into districts that receives more state aid) to an unknown positive impact (if 
students generally transfer into districts that receive less state aid) for both general revenue and 
school districts. Oversight assumes that some districts would see a net negative direct fiscal 
impact, while others would see a net positive direct fiscal impact.
Oversight is uncertain if this provision would reach a revenue impact of $250,000. Oversight 
notes if the difference in funding between districts is $1,000 (assumed) and approximately 250 
students transferred under this provision it would result in a revenue impact of $250,000.  
Oversight notes a change of 250 ADA is approximately a 0.03% change in total ADA 
(250/843,650); therefore, Oversight assumes it is possible the impact could exceed $250,000. 
Section 167.225 BRITE Act L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 25 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE stated the Missouri School for the 
Blind already provides many of the services required in this legislation with the exception of 
orientation and mobility evaluations at the home and paying for eye exams. To implement this 
legislation, the Department estimates the following costs per year: 
The orientation and mobility evaluations described in paragraph (b) of this subdivision shall 
occur in familiar and unfamiliar environments and around the home, school, and community as 
determined age appropriate by the blind students IEP.
40 students X 500 miles X $.43 mileage rate = $8,600
If an LEA requires an eye report, the LEA shall bear all costs associated with obtaining such 
report. LEAs shall not delay an evaluation for eligibility based on the absence or delay of such 
report.
40 students X $300 eye exam = $12,000
Total Cost = $20,600
Officials from the DSS assume the provision will have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
Oversight assumes this provision could result in additional costs to school districts if it imposes 
duties beyond those that school districts are already performing. Oversight will show a range of 
impact to school districts of $0 (no additional costs or can be absorbed) to an unknown cost.  
Section 167.268 - Develop Reading Guidelines
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE estimated a one-time meeting cost to 
develop DESE guidelines for the Office of Literacy at $44,600.
Section 167.625 - Will’s Law (HA15)
In response to a similar proposal, SB 710 (2022), officials from the Department of Elementary 
and Secondary Education, Department of Health and Senior Services and the Department 
of Social Services each assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective 
organizations. 
Officials from the above listed agencies each assume the provision will have no fiscal impact on 
their respective organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary.  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 26 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies for this 
provision.
In response to a similar proposal, SB 187 (2021), officials from the High Point R-III School 
District assumed the provision would not fiscally impact their district.
In response to a similar proposal, SB 187 (2021), officials from Fordland R-III School District 
stated the provision would require an additional position to administer.
Oversight will reflect a potential cost to school districts for additional staff training and 
administration of the requirements established in the bill.
Sections 167.640 and 167.645 - Reading Remediation (as amended by HSA 4) 
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1556 (2022), DESE stated the provision could impact 
the call to the foundation formula but they would have no way to estimate the impact. 
Oversight assumes there could be an increased call to the foundation formula if remediation 
hours outside of the traditional school day may count toward the calculation of average daily 
attendance (Section 167.640). Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (no additional 
remediation hours outside the traditional school day) to an unknown cost to General Revenue for 
an increase in average daily attendance.  
One full term of attendance is 1,044 hours per student. For each full term of attendance, the 
average state funding per ADA is approximately at $5,066 (per DESE) or $4.85 per hour of full 
term attendance. However, Oversight notes this is an approximation of the cost as the state aid 
payment can vary greatly by district.
Oversight estimates to reach a revenue impact of $250,000 would require a change in attendance 
hours of approximately 52,000 hours or approximately 50 ADA (52,000 * $4.85 = $252,200). 
Oversight notes an increase of 50 ADA is approximately a 0.01% increase in total ADA 
(50/843,650); therefore, Oversight assumes it is possible the cost could exceed $250,000.  
In response to a similar proposal, SB 54 (2021), officials from the Springfield R-XII School 
District stated the total fiscal impact to the district is $6,562,500.
In response to a similar proposal, SB 54 (2021), officials from the High Point R-III School 
District assumed the provision will have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2470 (2020), officials from the Park Hill School District 
anticipated a fiscal impact to hire additional staff to implement and monitor the extended 
requirements. Estimated cost would exceed $100,000 annually. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 27 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2470 (2020), officials from the Shell Knob School 
District assumed that bill would have a negative fiscal impact.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2470 (2020), officials from the Wellsville -Middletown 
School District estimated needing at least one possibly two additional elementary teachers, at a 
cost of $92,000 per year.
Oversight assumes these provisions would require school districts and charter schools to 
implement remediation strategies such as:






Per the Achievement Level Report available on the Missouri Comprehensive Data System, 
Oversight notes the following number of students with scores in the below basic level and the 
basic level within the Springfield School District:
Springfield School District - School Year 2019
GradeBelow BasicBasicTotalThird Grade4705501020Fourth Grade245707952Fifth Grade2338051038Sixth Grade317658975Total1,2652,7203,985
Based on the cost reported by the Springfield School District, Oversight estimates the cost per 
student reading at below basic and basic (in grades 3 through 6) at approximately $1,647 
($6,562,500/3,985). 
Statewide - School Year 2019
GradeBelow BasicBasicTotalThird Grade15,66418,52734,191Fourth Grade8,38926,40634,795Fifth Grade8,65328,51037,163Sixth Grade10,93827,22638,164Total43,644100,669144,313
Applying the $1,647 to the statewide total of students reading at below basic and basic in grades 
3 through 6, Oversight L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 28 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
school districts, Oversight is uncertain if other school districts would experience costs similar to 
those reported by the Springfield School District. Oversight assumes additional resources, 
namely additional teacher time, assessments and materials, will be required to implement these 
changes. Therefore, Oversight will show an unknown cost to school districts that could be 
significant. 
Section 167.850 - Recovery High Schools
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE and the Department of Mental 
Health each assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective 
organizations.  
Oversight received no responses from school districts estimating the fiscal impact of this 
provision, and presents this fiscal note on the best current information available. Upon the receipt 
of additional responses, Oversight will review to determine if an updated fiscal note should be 
prepared and seek the necessary approval to publish a new fiscal note.
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), 8.5 percent of Americans needed 
treatment for a problem related to illicit drug or alcohol use in 2014. 
Oversight assumes if 8.5 percent of the 4,043 students currently enrolled in the Kansas City 
Public School District (grades 9 through 12) needed substance use treatment, this could result in 
approximately 344 students being eligible to attend a recovery high school. Oversight assumes 
this number could be higher as non-resident students are also eligible to attend.    
Based on the study, Recovery High Schools: A Descriptive Study of Programs and Students
Oversight notes students were primarily referred to recovery high schools by treatment 
programs, parents and the juvenile justice system. Of the schools in the study, most had small 
enrollments ranging from 12 to 25 students with a median capacity of 35 students. The study 
indicated students reported a reduction in the use of drugs, an increase in attendance and a 
reduction in repeated problems with the law. 
Oversight assumes this provision states the sending district of an eligible student shall pay 
tuition to the recovery high school.   However, public schools may not see a 1:1 reduction in the 
costs associated with those students transferring out. Oversight also notes that such students 
recovering from substance use or dependency may not regularly attend school, or may require 
more expensive attention from school. Because there are no responses, and several factors that 
may save or cost school districts or recovery high schools, this note will show an impact ranging 
from a unknown savings to an unknown cost net direct fiscal impact to school districts and 
recovery high schools. 
Oversight notes this provision is permissive, therefore Oversight will range the fiscal impact 
from $0 (a recovery high school is not established) to the range of potential fiscal impact. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 29 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Section 168.021 - Provisionally Certified Teachers & Visiting Scholars’ Certificate
 
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. This provision modifies 168.021, which appears to change 
requirements that must be completed when having a provisional certification. Since that is still a 
certification attendance hours for students taught can still be claimed for state aid and has no 
fiscal impact. 
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary.  Therefore, Oversight will reflect a 
zero impact on the fiscal note for DESE for this provision.
Section 168.036 Substitute Teacher Certificates 
In response to the previous version, officials  from DESE stated this section allows the State 
Board of Education to grant a certificate to any highly qualified individual with certain expertise 
or experience in the Armed Forces, explained further in the bill, that may not meet any other 
qualifications if the school board of the seeking school district votes to approve that individual to 
substitute teach at that district. Doing so would require a new application and process for districts 
to recommend these individuals at which the department estimates a cost of $40,000. 
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE stated, currently, substitute certificates 
expire at the end of four years and may be renewed. The new language in this subsection would 
allow substitute certificates to expire at any point in time and will have a substantial fiscal impact 
to the department. The substitute certification process will need to be redesigned to comply with 
this language as well as a new reporting database will need to be created for districts to notify the 
department on substitute statuses. DESE estimates this will cost around $70,000. The department 
also estimates an additional FTE for an Administrative Assistant $27,960 annual salary, will be 
needed as well.  
Oversight will show the costs as estimated by DESE.
In response to the previous version, officials from Public Schools and Education Employee 
Retirement Systems (PSRS/PEERS) stated this bill allows individuals who are receiving a 
retirement benefit from PSRS or PEERS to substitute teach on a part-time or temporary 
substitute basis in a covered school district without a discontinuance of the person's retirement 
benefit. The provisions in this bill only apply to part-time or temporary substitute teaching. As 
specified in this bill if an individual chooses to work for a covered employer after retirement 
under this provision they will not contribute to additional retirement benefits. This bill includes 
an emergency clause and the provisions of this bill will expire on July 1, 2025 when the current 
statutory language will resume. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 30 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 2304 (2022), the PSRS/PEERS’ actuaries 
noted that suspension of limitations on working after retirement for part time or temporary 
substitute teaching positions through June 30, 2025 could result in either no fiscal cost or a small 
fiscal cost for PSRS and PEERS, depending on the number of members who change their 
retirement behavior as a result. The cost could be significant if the suspension of limitations on 
working after retirement continues to be extended beyond June 30, 2025. 
The current provisions for working after retirement in sections 169.560 and 169.660 strike a 
delicate balance between creating a pool of qualified individuals that can be employed to provide 
part-time or temporary substitute teaching or other services, but without permitting or 
incentivizing employers to hire multiple retired members on a part-time basis in lieu of full-time 
employees, or permitting or incentivizing active members to retire early, commence their 
retirement allowance, and then return to work on a full-time basis in order to effectively receive 
two incomes. Such permission and behavior could have a significant impact on the cost of the 
Systems. The fiscal impact to the PSRS and PEERS will be based on actual behavior 
experienced by the Systems.
It is noted that a temporary suspension of certain statutes and regulations related to members 
working after retirement was included in the state of emergency order in 2020 in response to the 
Coronavirus pandemic. The suspension was intended to address an anticipated shortage of 
qualified substitute teachers and temporary employees that would be needed by school districts 
during the pandemic. The temporary suspension was in place through December 31, 2021. HCS 
for HB 2304 suspends the same provisions in statute through June 30, 2025, but only for part 
time or temporary substitute teaching positions. 
The Systems’ actuaries emphasized the importance of the temporary nature of the proposal (only 
through June 30, 2025 as currently proposed in HCS for HB 2304) and its application to only 
part time or temporary substitute teaching. Permanent increase or removal of these limitations 
would likely come with a significant fiscal cost and would go against the fundamental goal of a 
pension system to provide income in retirement, not during active employment.
The table below summarizes the estimated impact to the liabilities and the actuarially determined 
contribution rate of both PSRS and PEERS associated with possible behavior changes discussed 
in the attached cost statement from the Systems’ actuaries. While the actuaries show two 
scenarios with a fiscal cost, they note that it is also possible for PSRS and PEERS to experience 
no fiscal cost related to these changes depending on whether or not active members and 
employers change their behavior as a result. To the extent there is little to no change in behavior, 
the results would be consistent with the baseline results shown below. It is important to review 
the attached cost statement in its entirety when reviewing the data noted below: L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 31 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight will show a range of impact for this provision of $0 (no change in behavior) to an 
unknown cost that could exceed $4,413,374 to member employers for increases in employer 
contributions (0.14% / 2 * $5,039,838,429 PSRS covered payroll 2021) plus (0.07%/2 * 
$1,758,535,339 PEERS covered payroll 2021). 
In response to the previous version, officials from the Department of Public Safety - Missouri 
Highway Patrol (MHP) stated the proposed legislation could increase the state fee from $20 up 
to $50 depending on the number of background checks performed up to five, resulting in a net 
increase to the Criminal Record System (CRS) Fund. The range is calculated based on the 
current state fee and the proposed language that increases the state fee up to $50. 
On average, the Patrol processes approximately 11,000 criminal record checks specific to 
substitute teacher certification and employment, of which approximately 145 per year resulted in 
checks for the same individual for different school districts and completed in the same week. 
However, an increase for the fund could be noted for the potential increase in the state fee, 
depending on the number of background checks performed.
Regardless of the state fee structure, this proposal would require technical system changes to the 
Missouri Automated Criminal History System to be completed by the MSHP’s Criminal History 
vendor. The estimated cost of $165,000 is based on previous projects with a similar scope of 
work. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 32 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight will show the cost for system modifications to the Missouri Automated Criminal 
History System and an unknown amount of revenue from the increased fees.
Section 168.037 - Substitute Teacher Survey and Data Collection
In response to the previous version, officials from assumed this provision required DESE 
to create and maintain a web-based survey for collecting anonymous information from substitute 
teachers in Missouri public schools.  DESE estimates an initial costs that could exceed $100,000 
for the design, programming, and testing of a system that can collect real time information from 
substitute teachers that will be available anytime for schools and DESE to use to study. DESE 
also estimates annual maintenance and storage costs of $10,000 annually.
Oversight assumes this provision requires DESE to create and maintain a web-based survey for 
collecting information related to substitute teachers. Oversight will show the costs as estimated 
by DESE. 
Oversight also assumes this provision requires school districts and charter schools to provide 
data to DESE regarding certain information related to substitute teachers. Oversight will show a 
range of impact of $0 (no additional cost or can be absorbed) to an unknown cost to collect the 
data for school districts and charter schools.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 608 (2021), officials from the Affton 101 School District, 
High Point R-III School District and the Springfield R-XII School District each assumed the 
provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. 
Section 168.205 - Superintendent Sharing
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from DESE stated because 
they are unsure of how many school districts will participate, DESE will provide a range for the 
estimated impact of $1,440,000 to $8,940,000. Shown below are the estimated impacts based on 
different levels of participation.

$8,940,000.

$6,510,000.

$3,900,000.

$1,440,000.   L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 33 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
The calculation is based on 2020 average daily attendance (ADA) due to 2021 ADA being 
impacted by COVID 19.
ADA Under Number of Districts Cost
600 ADA 298 $8,940,000.00
350 ADA 217 $6,510,000.00
200 ADA 130 $3,900,000.00
100 ADA 48 $1,440,000.00
Funding for this increase would most likely be General Revenue as no other funding was 
specified to pay this additional cost.
Oversight notes, according to a DESE report, previously there was only one superintendent that 
was shared between school districts.  The Malta Bend R-V School District and the Hardeman R-
X School District had such an agreement (Paul Vaillencourt).  These school districts no longer 
appear to share a superintendent. 
Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (no districts sharing a superintendent) to an amount 
that could exceed $60,000 in state funding based on two districts (2 x $30,000 each) sharing a 
superintendent.  
Section 168.500 and 168.515 - Career Ladders
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2493 (2022), officials from DESE stated due to the need to 
approve Teacher Career Plans in the proposed language, DESE estimates a need for 1.0 FTE at 
the Supervisor level to manage the program. 
Oversight notes the need to approve Teacher Career Plans is language that exists in current law 
and is not a new requirement of this provision. Therefore, Oversight will not show the cost for 
one additional FTE. 
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE stated, in Fiscal Year 2011, 
$37,467,000 was appropriated by the General Assembly for Career Ladder. That was the last 
time that the program was funded and DESE will base the fiscal impact on that amount. Because 
the language in this section (168.515.2) reverses the matching percentages and sets the state 
match at 60 percent and the local funding at 40 percent, the department estimates an impact of up 
to $56,200,050. Because this amount is subject to appropriation the Department will show a 
range of $0 - $56,200,050 (plus FTE costs).
Oversight assumes current law already provides for funding at forty percent; however, this 
funding is not currently appropriated by the General Assembly. Oversight assumes the impact 
from this provision is the difference between funding the Career Ladder program at forty percent 
(current law) versus funding at sixty percent (proposed law). Oversight will show a cost of $0  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 34 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
(not appropriated) to a cost that could exceed $18,733,050 ($56,200,050 - $37,467,000) as 
appropriated by the General Assembly.
In addition, Oversight assumes this provision expands the career ladder criteria for admission 
and stage achievement and reduces the number of years needed for eligibility. Oversight assumes 
this provision could result in an increase in eligible teacher compensation if appropriated. 
Oversight assumes these funds would transfer from General Revenue to the Excellence in 
Education Revolving Fund into the Career Ladder Forward Funding Fund before being 
distributed to qualify school districts. For simplicity, Oversight assumes all funds are utilized in 
the year they are received. 
Section 169.070 - Benefit Factor (HA16)
In response to similar proposals, HCS HB 2161 (2022), officials from Public Schools and 
Education Employee Retirement Systems assumed this legislation removes the expiration date 
of July 1, 2014 for the 2.55% Formula Factor Provision with 32 or more years of service for 
169.070.1(8), RSMo. This bill also contains an emergency clause. 
Currently, PSRS members who have 32 years or more of creditable service and retire have their 
retirement benefit calculated using a multiplier of 2.5%. This legislation removes the expiration 
date of July 1, 2014 for the 2.55% Formula Factor Provision with 32 or more years of service for 
169.070.1(8), RSMo. An active member must have 32 years or more of creditable service to 
have their retirement allowance calculated using the multiplier of 2.55%. 
The 2.55% Benefit Formula Factor Provision allows for eligible members with 32 or more years 
of service to retire with an additional 0.05% Formula Factor. Eligible service retirees who have 
32 or more years of service with PSRS are eligible for normal retirement under the benefit 
formula using the 2.55% factor. 
The Systems have an actuary firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), that prepares actuarial cost 
statements on any proposed legislation as well as the annual actuarial valuation reports for the 
Systems.
The analysis prepared by PwC indicates the proposed legislation would reduce the Plan’s 
Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL) by $227.4 million and result in an increase to the Plan’s pre-
funded ratio of 0.36%.
There are two components that impact the Actuarially Determined Contribution Rate (ADC) for 
a public retirement plan; the Normal Cost Rate (NC) and the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued 
Liability Rate (UAAL). The reduction of the AAL, results in a decrease in the annual UAAL rate 
resulting in annual savings of approximately $14 million for the next 30 years. There are 
additional annual savings of $7.1 million per year due to the reduction of the normal cost as a  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 35 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
result of these provisions being made a permanent part of the benefit structure. The annual 
normal costs savings will continue as long as the new provisions are in force (this could extend 
beyond 30 years).
The annual savings of $21.1 million per year for the next 30 years is due to the reduction of the 
UAAL Rate and the NC Rate of the Plan as a result of the 2.55% provision being made a 
permanent part of the benefit structure.  
Oversight assumes the reduction in the Normal Cost Rate and the Unfunded Actuarial Accrued 
Liability will result in a decrease to the Actuarially Determined Contribution (ADC) Rate. Below 
are the estimates provided by PricewaterhouseCoopers’ actuarial cost statement. 
Employer ContributionsFY 2023FY 2024FY 2025Baseline$709 million$679 million$643 millionProposed$699 million$668 million$633 millionSavings$10 million$11 million$10 million
Oversight assume this provision is effective August 28, 2022 (FY 2023). Given that actuarial 
determined contribution rates will have already been determined for FY 2023 once this provision 
is effective, Oversight will show a savings to local school districts beginning FY 2024.
Section 169.596 - Public School Retirement System
In response to the previous version, officials from the Public Schools and Education Employee 
Retirement Systems stated they have an actuary firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC), that 
prepares actuarial cost statements on any proposed legislation as well as the annual actuarial 
valuation reports for the Systems. This legislation has been submitted to them for an actuarial 
statement. As soon as the actuarial statement is available, the retirement systems will be 
amending the fiscal response to include PWC’s analysis. 
This legislation makes changes to the critical shortage statute, 169.596 for the Public School 
Retirement System of Missouri (PSRS) and the Public Education Employee Retirement System 
(PEERS). 
This provision allows retirees to return to work under the Critical Shortage Exemption statute up 
to four years versus the current two-year restriction. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2114 (2022), the actuarial cost estimate submitted by 
PSRS/PEERS stated: 
Contributions to PSRS due to the critical shortage modifications would result in an actuarial 
gain, as no additional benefits would be accrued and since employer contributions would be  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 36 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
made on all earnings for each retiree rehired under a critical shortage declaration. Therefore, they 
estimate the impact of the proposed critical shortage modifications to be an insignificant fiscal 
gain to PSRS. 
Contributions to PEERS due to the critical shortage modifications would result in an actuarial 
gain, as no additional benefits would be accrued and since employer contributions would be 
made on all earnings for each retiree rehired under a critical shortage declaration. Therefore, 
PWC estimates the impact of the proposed critical shortage modifications to be an insignificant 
fiscal gain
Oversight assumes any fiscal impact resulting from this provision would be insignificant and 
therefore will reflect a zero fiscal impact in this fiscal note for this provision. 
Section 170.014 - Reading Instruction Act
Oversight assumes there could be costs to school districts to expand reading programs through 
grade five. Currently, the reading programs are established for kindergarten through grade three. 
Section 170.018 Computer Science Course
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE assumed this provision would require 
updates to the June Core Data/MOSIS cycle to accommodate the bill’s requirements:
Adding a field to the MOSIS collection for Computer Science course description: 
$10,000 (one-time); $3,000 maintenance (annual) 
Adding a field to the MOSIS collection for Computer Science applicable standards: $10,000 
(one-time); $3,000 maintenance (annual).
DESE projects programming for the annual report to be published to cost $25,000 (one time 
cost) for a total cost of $45,000 ($10,000 + $10,000 + $25,000) and an ongoing cost of $6,000 
($3,000 + $3,000). 
The legislation also requires the department to add 1.0 FTE Computer Science 
Supervisor/Director ($51,288).
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect the 
costs provided by DESE for fiscal note purposes.
In response to a previous version, officials from the High Point R-III School District assumed 
the provision will have no fiscal impact on their organization. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 37 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this provision requires each school to offer at least one computer science 
course. Oversight is uncertain how many schools currently offer computer science courses. 
Oversight assumes there could be costs for those school districts that are not currently offering a 
computer science course; therefore, Oversight will show an unknown cost to school districts 
beginning in FY 2024. 
Section 170.024 Show-Me Digital Health Act (HA7)
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1585 (2022), officials from DESE assumed this provision 
requires DESE to develop a curriculum studying the responsible use of social media. This will 
require a partial FTE (0.25) at $12,534 for ongoing support and professional development, two 
(2) Contracted Employees for curriculum development $20,000 and four (4) meetings of 10 
people each: $22,300.
Oversight notes DESE indicated the need for a 0.25 FTE. Oversight will show this as a range of 
impact of $0 (duties can be absorbed by existing FTE) to the cost of hiring a full FTE.  
Oversight assumes DESE is to create a curriculum on the responsible use of social media for 
school districts to adopt beginning in the 2024-25 school year. School districts must provide 
professional development for teachers related to the responsible use of social media.
Oversight assumes teachers are already required to obtain a certain number of hours towards 
professional development. Oversight assumes this does create an additional requirement of 
hours.
Oversight does not anticipate a fiscal impact to school districts.  
Section 170.025 - Cursive Writing
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. 
Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for DESE for this section.  
In response to a similar proposal, HB 108 (2021), officials from the Bowling Green R-1 School 
District state this provision is redundant. This is already a communications arts standard in their 
state that requires students in 2nd and 3rd grade to write legibly (print, cursive).  
In response to a similar proposal, HB 108 (2021), officials from the Fordland R-III School 
District, High Point R-III School District and the Shell Knob 78 School District each 
assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations.   L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 38 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a similar proposal, HB 54 (2019), the Springfield Public Schools said it would 
cost $85,000 in materials, assessments and teacher time.
Oversight notes the English Language Arts Missouri Learning Standards
standard for Grade 2 and Grade 3 to “write legibly (print, cursive)”. 
Based on the cost estimate provided by the Springfield Public Schools and the district’s 4
th
 and 
5
th
 grade enrollment numbers, Oversight estimates a per student cost of approximately $21 
($85,000/4,087).  
The statewide total enrollment for Grade 4 and Grade 5 is 129,695 (for the 21-22 school year). 
Assuming a per student cost of $21, Oversight estimates the cost to implement this provision at 
$2,273,595. However, Oversight notes some districts indicated there would be no fiscal impact 
from this provision; therefore, Oversight will show a cost of less than $2,273,595. 
Section 170.027 - Driver Education (HA8)
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2745 (2022), officials from Department of 
Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) stated, per RSMo Section 160.516, DESE 
cannot mandate a curriculum but rather can develop the curriculum framework in accordance 
with RSMo Section 160.514. DESE will convene a work group to develop the curriculum 
framework for this driver’s education course. The cost of convening this group is $24,760.
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2745 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Public Safety - Missouri Highway Patrol assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact 
on their organization. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, 
Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for this agency.  
Oversight assumes this provision would require school districts and charter schools to offer a 
driver education course that meets the certain requirements. 
Oversight notes the following driver education courses in Missouri:

who live in the district and $430 for students who live outside the district.

Parkway and Rockwood school districts) offers a fee-based driver’s education program 
that includes classroom instruction, six hours of behind the wheel training and twelve 
hours of in-car observation. The cost is $395.

a fee of $295 per student. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 39 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD

$289 with a total of 3 hours of drive-time.

with an optional driving experience for an additional fee.

$180.

driving, 12 hours of observation, and 3 hours of behind-the-wheel driving. The fee for the 
course is $290.
In addition, Oversight notes the following public schools in other states currently offer driver’s 
education courses to students for a fee as outlined in the table below.
SchoolFeeChesterfield Co. (VA) Public Schools$210Des Moines (IA) Public Schools $365Helena (MT) Public Schools $305Bristol (CT) Public Schools $425Crookston (MN) Public Schools$325Hillsborough Co. (FL) Public Schools$250
Driver’s education is provided in all school districts in North Carolina and is available to all 
public, private, charter and home-schooled students. School districts may charge students a fee of 
$65 to offset the cost of providing the course.  
Oversight notes the estimates provided below represent the cost of if 1/3 of high school students 
elected to take a driver’s education course per year. However, Oversight notes this provision 
does not appear to require the driver’s education course to graduate. In addition, this provision 
does not require a student to physically operate a motor vehicle. Therefore, the cost for districts 
to implement this provision would be less than the estimates below and would ultimately depend 
on the number of students who elected to take the driver’s education course. 
Based on information from the Missouri Comprehensive Data System, Oversight notes the 
preliminary enrollment numbers for the 2021-2022 school year for 10
th
 through 12
th
 grade was 
200,127. If 1/3 of 10
th
 through 12
th
 graders (66,709) take the driver education course per year, 
Oversight estimates the potential costs to school districts in the chart below assuming different 
per costs per course.  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 40 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Assumed Course Cost Per StudentEstimated Cost to Public Schools$180 (* 66,709)$12,007,620$297 (* 66,706)$19,812,573$395 (* 66,706)$26,348,870
Oversight notes the recommend number of hours for most driver’s education courses is 30 hours 
of formal classroom instruction and 6 hours of behind the wheel training. Oversight estimates the 
following basic costs in the chart below assuming 66,709 students were required to take 30 hours 
of in-class instruction and 6 hours of driving instruction. 
Oversight assumed an average class size of 25 and a pay rate of $26 per hour for certified 
instruction. Oversight notes the costs below do not include curriculum, insurance, retirement 
benefits, fuel, maintenance or other costs.
Estimated Instructional HoursEstimated Cost(66,709 * 30 hours) / 25 class size 80,051$2,081,326(66,709 * 6 hours)400,254$10,406,604566 high schools * 1 car ($18,000)-$10,188,000	Total$22,675,930
Oversight estimates the cost of providing drivers’ education courses in public schools could 
exceed $22,675,903 in the first year with annually recurring costs that could exceed $12,487,930.
Oversight assumes, if 1/3 of high school students elected to take a driver’s education course that 
did not include behind the wheel training, the cost is estimated at approximately $2,081,326.
Based on information previously provided by DESE, Oversight notes 30 of the 566 high schools 
in Missouri offered driver’s education courses in 2016-2017 with an enrollment of 3,256 
students. 
Based on information recently provided by DESE for the 2020-2021 school year, Oversight 
notes 35 of the 566 high schools offered a driver’s education course during their regular school 
year and 73 of the 566 high schools offered a driver’s education course during their summer 
term. Oversight is uncertain how many students are enrolled in these courses.
Ultimately, Oversight is unsure how much it would cost school districts and charter schools to 
offer a driver’s education course and is uncertain how many school districts may currently offer 
driver education courses. Therefore, Oversight will show an unknown cost to school districts and 
charter schools to implement the provision of this provision. 
Section 170.036 Computer Science Task Force (as amended by HA2 to HA5) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 41 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
In response to a previous version, officials from stated the proposed legislation does not 
indicate who is responsible for any costs associated with the Computer Science Education Task 
Force. If DESE is financially responsible, the Department estimates a total of four meetings per 
year for the 13 member task force.  This cost would cover a two year time span, for a total 
meeting cost of $84,740.
Oversight will show the costs for two Task Force meetings at $42,370 each as estimated by 
DESE beginning in FY 2023. Oversight assumes the Task Force is dissolved at the end of FY 
2024. 
In addition, Oversight will show a potential unknown cost for on-going evaluation and 
implementation of task force findings. Oversight assumes this cost would be dependent on the 
findings and recommendations of the task force. 
Oversight notes, per the Tennessee Computer Science State Education Plan, task force 
recommendations included regional trainings ($30,713), grants to educators ($300,000) and K-8 
computer science standards and trainings ($84,000). Based on these estimates, Oversight will 
show a range of impact of $0 (cost of implementing task force finding can be absorbed with 
existing appropriations) to an unknown cost that could exceed $250,000.  
In response to a similar proposal, SB 659 (2022), officials from the Department of Higher 
Education and Workforce Development, Office of the Governor and Missouri House of 
Representatives each assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective 
organizations. Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight 
will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for these agencies.  
Officials from the Missouri State Senate anticipate a negative fiscal impact to reimburse 2 
senators for travel to task force meetings. It will cost approximately $255.78 per meeting.
Oversight assumes the General Assembly could absorb the cost of the Task Force meetings 
within the current appropriation levels and will not reflect a fiscal impact.
Section 170.047 Suicide Prevention Training
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE assumed the provision would have 
no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (HCS for HBs 1820 & 1470), officials from the 
Normandy Schools Collaborative estimated that this additional required training will cost 
$8,000 or more per year to find time for the additional training, identify and pay trainers, and pay 
extra time extra duty if necessary for teachers to attend if the SP schedule is already packed full. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 42 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this provision allows, but does not require all teachers, principals, and 
licensed educators in each district to attend suicide prevention training which shall count as two 
hours of professional development under section 168.021. Oversight assumes this provision 
would not have a fiscal impact as the teachers are already required to have a set number of 
professional development hours, and suicide education is permissive.
Section 170.048 and 173.1200 - Pupil Identification Cards
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 2136 (2022), officials from University of Central 
Missouri assumed this provision would have a minimal impact.
In response to a similar proposal from 2020 (HB 1820), officials from the University of 
Missouri System assumed, as written, the proposed bill would have little to no fiscal impact on 
the University. Many of the four UM universities already include some, if not all, of this 
information on their student ID cards. If provision 173.1200 Section 7 Subsection (2) were 
removed relating to the use of existing supplies, the fiscal impact of this legislation would be 
significant.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 304 (2022), officials from State Technical College of 
Missouri stated this provision would have a negative fiscal impact on the College.  Their current 
student ID printer will not allow information to be printed on the back of the ID card. 
In response to a similar proposal, officials from the Missouri State University assumed the 
provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
In response to the previous version, officials from the St. Charles Community College assumed 
the provision would have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
Oversight assumes these provisions require school districts, charter schools and public 
institutions of higher education that issue pupil identification cards to have printed on the card a 
specific number that routes calls and text messages to the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. 
Oversight assumes the provision could result in one-time additional costs for equipment or 
supplies. Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (any additional cost is minimal and can be 
absorbed with existing resources) to an unknown cost.
Section 170.307 - Mental Health Instruction (HA1 to HA5)
In response to a similar proposal, SB 1057 (2022), officials from DESE stated, while some of 
this work is currently funded through a CDC grant, should that source be withdrawn, the 
programs described here would create an expenditure impact for DESE. If DESE contracted with 
outside entities for the programs described, there would still be personnel and administrative  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 43 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
costs incurred, as well as costs for developing any resources to support educators. Meeting costs 
associated with potential curriculum development estimated at $22,300.
Oversight assumes DESE may be able to utilize federal monies to fund the requirements so the 
program.  
Oversight has ranged the fiscal impact to General Revenue from $0 (may be able to be covered 
by existing federal funding) to the costs provided by DESE for meeting costs for curriculum 
development.
Oversight has ranged the fiscal impact to Federal Funds from $0 (federal funding not available) 
to the costs provided by DESE for meeting costs for curriculum development.
Oversight assumes the mental health instruction shall be included in the district's existing health 
or physical education curriculum. The instruction is to be based on the curriculum developed by 
DESE; therefore, Oversight does not anticipate a fiscal impact to school districts. 
Section 170.375 - One Class Period Devoted to Black Americans Throughout History
Oversight assumes these requirements can be incorporated into existing lesson plans and, 
therefore, Oversight will not show a fiscal impact to school districts.
Section 170.376 - One Class Period Devoted to Native Americans Throughout History (HA17)
Oversight assumes these requirements can be incorporated into existing lesson plans and, 
therefore, Oversight will not show a fiscal impact to school districts.
Section 171.033 - Inclement Weather 
In response to the previous version, officials from the DESE estimated a minimal impact from 
the proposed legislation as it would result in ITSD costs to modify edits in Web Applications 
(webpage school districts/charters use to submit data to the department). 
OA-ITSD assumes every new IT project/system will be bid out because all ITSD resources are at 
full capacity. IT contract rates are estimated at $95/hour. It is assumed modifications will require 
120.96 hours for a cost of $11,491 in FY 2023 with continuing costs of $2,356 in FY 2024 and 
$2,415 in FY 2025.
Per DESE’s School Calendar Requirements publication, “A half-day Kindergarten or 
Prekindergarten program must provide a minimum of five hundred twenty-two hours of actual 
pupil attendance and shall also include thirty-six make-up hours for possible loss of attendance 
due to inclement weather.” Oversight assumes that this provision would potentially reduce the 
number of hours required for makeup days on a proportional basis.  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 44 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this section could result in savings if it reduces transportation costs, hourly 
wages, food service costs, etc. Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (no impact) to an 
unknown savings to school districts from a reduction in the number of hours required.
Section 173.831 - Workforce Diploma Program
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE assumed they may require 1.0 FTE at a 
minimum at the supervisor level in order to publish the request for qualifications, review the 
applicants against the statutory requirements, collect data, run reports, and make payments. 
As of 2017, there are 453,226 Missourians 21 years of age or older who have not received a high 
school diploma. It is estimated that approximately 1 percent (4,532) to 3 percent (13,597) of 
these individuals may participate in this program. Because payments made to providers are to be 
made in accordance with a schedule set with the Department, DESE will make several 
assumptions for payment amounts based on previous versions of the bill. 
Completion of each half unit of high school credit - $250
Attaining an employability certificate - $250
Attaining an industry recognized credential (50 hours) - $250
Attaining an industry recognized credential (75 hours) - $500
Attaining an industry recognized credential (100 hours) - $250
Attaining a high school diploma - $1,000
The Department estimates that approximately half of the individuals that would participate in the 
program may earn their high school diploma each year which would result in a cost between 
$2,266,000 (2,266 students earn a diploma) and $6,799,000 (6,799 students earn a diploma) per 
year. 
The Department also estimates that each student participating in the program would earn at least 
one full unit of high school credit each year resulting in an additional amount of $2,266,000 
(4,532 students earn at least one full unit of high school credit) and $6,799,000 (13,597 students 
earn at least one full unit of high school credit) per year. 
If 10 percent of graduates also earned an industry recognized credential at an average of $500 the 
Department estimates an additional cost of $113,300 (2,266 x 10% x $500) to $339,950 (6,799 x 
10% x $500).
If 50 percent of graduates also earned an employability skills certificate, the Department 
estimates an additional cost of $283,250 (2,266 x 50% x $200) to $849,875 (6,799 x 50% x 
$250).
$2,266,000 - $6,799,000 for high school diploma achievements   L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 45 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
$283,250 - $849,875 for employability skills certificate achievements  
$113,300 - $339,950 for industry recognized credential achievements 
$2,266,000 - $6,799,000 for ½ unit of high school credit achievements 
$4,928,550 - $14,787,825
Because this provision is subject to appropriation, the Department will show a range of $0 (no 
money appropriated for the program) to $14,857,084 starting in FY23.
At the time this fiscal note was presented, DESE had not yet provided salary, fringe and 
equipment costs for the necessary FTE. Oversight estimated the cost based on a similar proposal 
from the previous year, HB 733 (2021). 
Oversight will show a range of impact of $0 (not appropriated) to the costs as estimated by 
DESE as a transfer from General Revenue to the Workforce Diploma Program Fund. 
Oversight will show the costs as estimated by DESE to the Workforce Diploma Program Fund 
for reimbursements to program providers. Oversight assumes funds will be used within the year 
they were received. 
In response to the previous version, officials from the Office of the State Treasurer assumed 
the provision will have no fiscal impact on their organization. 
Oversight assumes DESE is required to issue a request for interested program providers before 
September 1, 2022. Program providers must be approved by October annually and students may 
start enrolling in November annually. Oversight assumes DESE could request and approve 
program providers any time before September 2022 and after the effective date of this provision 
August 28, 2022. Therefore, Oversight will show cost beginning in FY 2023. 
Per the SS SCS HCS HB 3002 (2022), Oversight notes an appropriation from General Revenue 
for a Workforce Diploma Program for $2,000,000 for FY 2023. Oversight will show a $0 to 
unknown impact in the remaining years. 
§173.1352 – Advance Placement Exams (HA13)
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1683 (2022), officials from the University of 
Central Missouri (UCM) stated the estimated loss to UCM would be approximately 
$5,800. This is based on 8 students who this fall scored a 3 in areas that currently require a 4 on 
the Advanced Placement Exam.  8 students x 3 credit hours =24 course credits.
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Oversight notes changes to this version 
of the provision have removed the fiscal impact that other colleges and universities had expected  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 46 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
to incur. Therefore, Oversight assumes the potential loss to UCM would be absorbable within 
current funding levels and will present no fiscal impact for this agency for fiscal note purposes. 
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1683 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Elementary and Secondary Education, the Department of Higher Education and 
Workforce Development, the University of Missouri and Missouri State University each 
assume the provision will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight 
does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in 
the fiscal note for these agencies.
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1683 (2022), officials from St. Charles Community 
CollegeOversight 
does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in 
the fiscal note for this agency.
Section 169.560 Pay-Based Limit (HA14)
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 811 (2021), a cost estimate as requested by 
the Public Schools and Education Employee Retirement Systems stated: 
PEERS Analysis
RSMo 169.560 Paragraph 2, would be amended to increase the pay-based limit on working after 
retirement applied to members of the Public School Retirement System ("PSRS") who retire, 
commence their PSRS retirement allowance, and subsequently return to work in positions that do 
not require DESE certification and are otherwise covered by PEERS. The limit would be 
increased from 60% of the minimum teacher salary (currently 60% of $25,000, or $15,000) to 
the federal social security annual earnings exemption amount ($18,960 for 2021 and indexed in 
future years). 
An increase to the pay-based limit on working after retirement under RSMo, 169.560 Paragraph 
2, would provide greater incentive for retired PSRS members to return to work and greater 
ability for school districts to replace full-time PEERS employees with multiple part-time 
employees. This could impact the level of active membership in PEERS over time. However, 
contributions from school districts related to such employees are paid to PEERS without an 
accrual of benefits in PEERS. For these reasons, the proposed change is expected to be an 
insignificant fiscal gain to PEERS.
PSRS Analysis
RSMo 169.560 Paragraph 2, would be amended to increase the pay-based limit on working after 
retirement applied to PSRS members who retire, commence their PSRS retirement allowance, 
and subsequently return to work in positions that do not require DESE certification and are  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 47 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
otherwise covered by the Public Education Employee Retirement System ("PEERS"). The limit 
would be increased from 60% of the minimum teacher salary (currently 60% of $25,000, or 
$15,000) to the federal social security annual earnings exemption amount ($18,960 for 2021 and 
indexed in future years).
An increase to the pay-based limit on working after retirement under RSMo, 169.560 Paragraph 
2, would provide greater incentive for retired PSRS members to return to work and greater 
ability for school districts to replace full-time PEERS employees with multiple part-time 
employees. This could impact the level of active membership in PEERS over time, but is not 
expected to impact PSRS membership. Contributions from school districts related to such 
employees are also paid to PEERS, not PSRS. Finally, PSRS members who choose to return to 
work after retirement rarely exceed the limitations that would cause their retirement allowance to 
be suspended. For these reasons, the proposed change is expected to have an insignificant fiscal 
impact to PSRS.
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero 
impact in the fiscal note for this provision.  
Section 178.694 - Imagination Library of Missouri Program
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE estimated the need for one (1) FTE 
Program Specialist at an annual salary of $45,443.  The Program Specialist would manage the 
contracts and/or communication with the non-profit ("Dolly Parton's Imagination Library 
Affiliate"), oversee the activities required, and be responsible for communication and 
collaboration with the school districts regarding the implementation of this program.
Beginning in school year 2023-24 and continuing in each subsequent school year, school districts 
shall, in partnership with the affiliate, give one reading selection to each eligible child in the 
school district in each month, beginning as early as the child's birth month through the month in 
which the child reaches five years of age. Subject to appropriation, the costs of giving such 
reading selections to eligible children shall be reimbursed to each school district from the 
“Imagination Library of Missouri Program Fund.” 
According to the CDC Vital Statistics Surveillance Report, there were approximately 70,000 
children born in Missouri in 2020. Assuming a child could receive up to 60 books before turning 
five years of age and an average cost of $30 per year per child, DESE estimates a cost of up to 
$10,500,000. 
Number of children ages 0 – 5: 350,000 (70,000 births/year * 5)
Cost per child/year: $30
Total yearly costs: $10,500,000 L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 48 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Because this amount is subject to appropriations DESE will show a range of $0 - $10,500,000. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 2567 (2022), officials from Sikeston R-6 School District 
state this would be a great program, but are concerned if Missouri would remain committed to 
reimbursing school districts this new financial expenditure. Districts would incur the cost of 
purchasing and shipping the books to the homes of families within the district.  It would be 
beneficial if Missouri could provide a means for school districts to provide information prior to 
ordering the books and DESE provided the funds to purchase the books instead of a 
reimbursement process.
Oversight assumes this provision requires each school district to provide each child birth to five 
with one reading selection per month starting beginning in the 2023-2024 school year (FY 2024).  
Oversight notes, per the U.S. Census Bureau Missouri QuickFacts, persons under 5 years of age 
account for 6% of Missouri’s population or 370,091. Per the Imagination Library website, a $25 
dollar donation can provide a book to a child each month for a year. Oversight assumes the costs 
to school districts are estimated at $9,252,275 per year (370,091 * $25) beginning in FY 2024. 
Oversight assumes school districts shall be reimbursed for this cost from the Imagination 
Library of Missouri Program Fund. Oversight assumes this provision requires the general 
assembly to appropriate at least $5 million annually for this purpose. For simplicity, Oversight 
assumes all funds will be used within the year they are received.  
If the costs of providing the reading selections exceeds the available appropriations, Oversight 
assumes the school districts will bear the remaining cost. 
Section 186.080 - Literacy Advisory Council
In response to the previous version, officials from DESE estimated ongoing annual meeting 
costs to maintain the Literacy Advisory Council at $44,600.
 
Sections 302.010 and 304.060 - Other Vehicles for Transportation of Students (as amended, by 
HA2)
In response to a previous version, officials from Department of Revenue (DOR) stated section 
302.010.21 changes the definition of school bus to mean any vehicle designed for carrying more 
than ten passengers used to transport students for educational purposes.
Section 304.060.1 gives school districts the authority to use vehicles other than school buses for 
the purpose of transporting school children. The state board of education may adopt rules and 
regulations governing the use of other vehicles used to transport school children, except vehicles  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 49 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
operating under sections §387.400 to §387.440. The draft language further removes the 
requirement for drivers of such vehicles to meet the provisions of §302.272, thus removing the 
requirement to meet school bus endorsement testing, issuance, driver history and background 
check requirements. It also requires vehicles other than school buses to transport no more 
children than the manufacturer suggests appropriate, and meet any additional requirements of the 
school district.
The proposed change to remove the requirements of §302.272, may have an impact on the safety 
of students being transported in vehicles other than a commercial class school bus. Under current 
requirements drivers applying for a non-commercial Class E with a school bus endorsement are 
required to complete additional driver history and background checks and regular drug testing. 
This also includes the current mandatory annual skills provisions to ensure driving proficiency 
for those school bus endorsed drivers age 70 and over. School districts are required to report 
failed drug tests to the Department for suspension of school bus endorsements. Drivers without 
school bus endorsements may not be held to the same requirements.
Administrative Impact
To implement the proposed legislation, the DOR will be required to:

to include the new information (online and printed versions).
FY23-Driver License Bureau
Research/Data Analyst 15 hrs. @ $24.29 per hr. =$364
Administrative Manager 10 hrs. @ $26.37 per hr. =$264
Total $628
FY23-Personnel Services Bureau
Associate Research/Data Analyst 15 hrs. @ $19.46 per hr. =$292
Associate Research/Data Analyst 15 hrs. @ $19.46 per hr. =$292
Total $584
Total Costs =$1,212
The DOR anticipates being able to absorb these costs. However, until the FY23 budget is final, 
the Department cannot identify specific funding sources. If multiple bills pass that require 
Department resources, FTE/funding will be requested through the appropriations process.
The proposed legislation would require updates to the Missouri Driver Guide that could be 
absorbed. Decisions made during implementation could result in a requirement for destruction 
and replacement of current driver guide supplies and printing costs outside of normal reordering.
The printing costs of the driver guide are currently covered by the Missouri State Highway Patrol 
(MSHP). L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 50 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes these costs are minimal and can be absorbed by the DOR and MSHP.
In reponse to the previous version, officials from the DESE and Department of Public Safety - 
Missouri Highway Patrol
respective organizations.   
Oversight does not anticipate an impact to school districts.
Section 571.101 and 571.205 – Concealed carry permits (HA1 to HA6)
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1833 (2022), officials from the Department of 
Revenue and the Department of Public Safety – (Missouri Highway Patroland Missouri 
National Guard) each assumed the provision would have no fiscal impact on their respective 
organizations. 
In response to a similar proposal, HB 1833 (2022), officials from the Office of the State Courts 
Administrator and the Phelps County Sheriff’s Department assumed the provision would 
have no fiscal impact on their organizations. 
Oversight does not have any information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero 
impact in the fiscal note for this provision.  
Responses regarding the proposed legislation as a whole
In response to the previous version, officials from Attorney General’s Office, Department of 
Mental Health, Office of the State Treasurer, Department of Higher Education and 
Workforce Development and the University of Missouri System each assume the provision 
will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight does not have any 
information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for 
these agencies.  
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Office of 
Administration - Administrative Hearing Commission, each assume the provision will have 
no fiscal impact on their respective organizations. Oversight does not have any information to 
the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for this agency.  
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Joint Committee on 
Public Employee Retirement (JCPER) state the JCPER has reviewed this provision. The 
provision has no fiscal impact to the Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement. The 
JCPER’s review of the provision indicates that its provisions may constitute a “substantial 
proposed change” in future plan benefits as defined in section 105.660(10).  It is impossible to 
accurately determine the fiscal impact of this legislation without an actuarial cost statement  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 51 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
prepared in accordance with section 105.665.  Pursuant to section 105.670, an actuarial cost 
statement must be filed with the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives, the Secretary of 
the Senate, and the Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement as public information for at 
least five legislative days prior to final passage.
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Kansas City Election 
Board stated if this legislation causes a School District election, the cost in the Kansas City 
portion of Jackson County would range from $10,000 to $250,000. 
In response to a similar proposal, HCS HB 1753 (2022), officials from the Jackson County 
Election Board, Platte County Election Board and the Gordon Parks Elementary Charter 
School each assume the provision will have no fiscal impact on their respective organizations.   
In response to a similar proposal, Perfected HCS HB 1750 (2022), officials from the University 
of Central Missouri state there is an indeterminate fiscal impact due to uncertainty of 
application.
Oversight received a limited number of responses from school districts related to the fiscal 
impact of this provision. Oversight has presented this fiscal note on the best current information 
available. Upon the receipt of additional responses, Oversight will review to determine if an 
updated fiscal note should be prepared and seek the necessary approval to publish a new fiscal 
note.
Oversight only reflects the responses received from state agencies and political subdivisions; 
however, school districts were requested to respond to this proposed legislation but did not. A 
listing of political subdivisions included in the Missouri Legislative Information System 
(MOLIS) database is available upon request.
Section 170.027 - Driver Education (HA 8) 
In response to a similar proposal (HCS for HB 2745 from the 2022 session) Officials from 
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) state, per RSMo Section 
160.516, DESE cannot mandate a curriculum but rather can develop the curriculum framework 
in accordance with RSMo Section 160.514. DESE will convene a work group to develop the 
curriculum framework for this driver’s education course. The cost of convening this group is 
$24,760.
Officials from the Department of Public Safety - Missouri Highway Patrol assume the 
proposal will have no fiscal impact on their organization. Oversight does not have any 
information to the contrary. Therefore, Oversight will reflect a zero impact in the fiscal note for 
this agency.   L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 52 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Oversight assumes this proposal would require school districts and charter schools to offer a 
driver education course that meets the certain requirements. 
Ultimately, Oversight is unsure how much it would cost school districts and charter schools to 
offer a driver’s education course and is uncertain how many school districts may currently offer 
driver education courses. Therefore, Oversight will show an unknown cost to school districts and 
charter schools to implement the provision of this proposal. 
Rule Promulgation
Officials from the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules assume this proposal is not 
anticipated to cause a fiscal impact beyond its current appropriation. 
Officials from the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS) note many bills considered by the 
General Assembly include provisions allowing or requiring agencies to submit rules and 
regulations to implement the act. The SOS is provided with core funding to handle a certain 
amount of normal activity resulting from each year's legislative session. The fiscal impact for 
this fiscal note to the SOS for Administrative Rules is less than $5,000. The SOS recognizes that 
this is a small amount and does not expect that additional funding would be required to meet 
these costs. However, the SOS also recognizes that many such bills may be passed by the 
General Assembly in a given year and that collectively the costs may be in excess of what the 
office can sustain with its core budget. Therefore, the SOS reserves the right to request funding 
for the cost of supporting administrative rules requirements should the need arise based on a 
review of the finally approved bills signed by the governor. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 53 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – State 
Government
FY 2023
(10 Mo.)
FY 2024FY 2025GENERAL REVENUE FUNDCost – OA
   Added Reporting Requirements to 
the Missouri Accountability Portal
§37.850  p. 4
   FTE Cost($61,155)($61,155)($61,155)  ITSD Cost($16,416)($3,365)($3,449)Total Cost – OA($77,571)($64,520)($64,604)  FTE Change – OA1 FTE1 FTE1 FTECosts - DESE - develop and maintain 
new MOSIS data collection for ARPA 
report - §160.067  p. 6
($40,000)$0$0
Costs – DSS - §160.261  p. 6$0 to …$0 to …$0 to …  Personnel Service($43,756)($53,032)($53,563)  Fringe Benefits($28,478)($34,349)($34,527)  Expense & Equipment($11,439)($7,991)($8,191)Total Costs - ($83,673)($95,372)($96,281)FTE Change1.12 FTE1.12 FTE1.12 FTECosts - for meeting to develop a model 
policy - §160.516  p. 7($56,865)$0$0
Costs - STO - 160.560.8  p. 7Up to….Up to….  Personnel Service$0($80,210)($81,012)  Fringe Benefits$0($49,664)($49,908)  Expense & Equipment$0($28,500)($11,236)Total Costs – STO$0($158,374)($142,156)FTE Change0Up to 2 FTEUp to 2 FTECosts - DESE - policy development 
and modifications to data collection 
system - §160.565  p. 8($35,000)$0$0
Costs - DESE - §160.565  p. 8Could exceed...Could exceed...Could exceed... L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 54 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
   Personal Service($42,740)($51,801)($52,319)  Fringe Benefits($26,012)($31,400)($31,589)  Expense & Equipment($15,858)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs($84,610)($91,489)($92,402)FTE Change DESE1 FTE1 FTE1 FTETransfer Out - to the School Safety 
Program Fund - §160.671  p. 9
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - meeting costs to align literacy 
instruction - §161.097  p. 9($40,140)$0$0
Costs - DESE - support for school 
districts implementing School 
Innovation Waivers - §161.214  p. 10
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - DESE - §161.241  p. 10  Personnel Service($52,900)($64,115)($64,756)  Fringe Benefits($29,704)($35,875)($36,108)  Expense & Equipment($15,858)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs - DESE($98,462)($108,278)($109,358)FTE Change1 FTE1 FTE1 FTE
Costs - to recruit and employ quality 
teacher trainers - §161.241  p. 10
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$100,000)
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$100,000)
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$100,000)
Transfer Out - to the Evidence-Based 
Reading Instruction Program Fund - 
§161.241.9    p. 10($25,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs – DESE – Competency-Based 
Education Task Force - 161.385  p. 11($25,000)($25,000)($25,000)
Costs – DESE – development of   
competency-based assessments (PER 
COURSE/CONTENT DOMAIN) 
p. 11 
($500,000 to 
Unknown)
($500,000 to 
Unknown)$0
Transfer Out – to the Competency-
Based Education Grant Program Fund $0 to 
(Unknown)
 
$0 to 
(Unknown)
$0 to 
(Unknown) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 55 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
– unknown number and amount of 
grants 161.380.3  p. 11
Revenue Gain - from funding withheld 
from school districts and charter 
schools for violating section - 
§162.005.4   p. 13
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Revenue Loss - from funding returned 
to school districts and charter schools 
for reestablishing compliance - 
§162.005.4  p. 13
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Cost – DESE – potential cost to 
foundation formula associated with 
students taking competency-based 
courses 162.1255.2 & 3  p. 11
$0 to 
(Unknown)
 
$0 to 
(Unknown)
$0 to 
(Unknown)
Costs - DESE - develop a Holocaust 
curriculum - §161.700  p. 12($22,300)$0$0
Costs - DESE - professional 
development framework - §161.700 
p. 12
($66,900)$0$0
Cost Avoidance - denial of non-special 
education costs - §162.974  p. 19 UnknownUnknownUnknown
Transfer Out - to High Need Fund - 
§162.974  p. 19
($17,087 or 
Unknown)
($17,087 or 
Unknown)
($17,087 or 
Unknown)
Transfer Out - Increased formula 
funding to Gasconade County R-II, 
Maries County R-II, Bismarck R-V 
and the West St. Francois County R-
IV school districts - §163.016  p. 21
$0 to 
($2,165,902)
$0 to 
($2,165,902)
$0 to 
($2,165,902)
Costs - transportation calculation 
changes - §163.161  p. 22
(Could exceed 
$100,000)$0$0
Transfer Out – to the Parent Public 
School Choice Fund §167.1212.1 $0($60,000,000)
$0 or  
(Unknown) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 56 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
p. 24Costs or Cost Avoidance – Difference 
in state funding for resident district 
and nonresident district for 
transferring students §167.1205, 
§167.1210 & §167.151  p. 22 & 25
$0(Unknown) or 
Unknown
(Unknown) or 
Unknown
Costs – DESE – data collection 
mechanisms and reporting §167.1200 - 
§167.1230  p. 23
($35,000)($3,500)($3,500)
Costs – DESE – to conduct hearings 
on appeals §167.1220  p. 22
Less than 
($100,000)
Less than 
($100,000)
Less than 
($100,000)
Costs - DESE - §167.1230.11  p. 23  Personnel Service($42,740)($51,801)($52,319)  Fringe Benefits($24,375)($29,423)($29,598)  Expense & Equipment($15,858)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs - ($82,973)($89,512)($90,411)FTE Change1 FTE1 FTE1 FTECosts - BRITE Act - orientation and 
mobility evaluations and eye reports - 
§167.225  p. 25 
($20,600)($20,600)($20,600)
Costs - meeting costs to develop 
guidelines for the Office of Literacy - 
§167.268  p. 26
($44,600)$0$0
Costs - increased ADA for 
remediation hours - §167.640 & 
§167.645  p. 26
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - DESE - new application and 
process - §168.036.5  p. 29($40,000)$0$0
Costs - DESE - new certification 
process and reporting database - 
§168.036.7  p. 29($70,000)$0$0
Costs - DESE - §168.036.7  p. 30 L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 57 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
   Personnel Service($27,960)($28,240)($28,522)  Fringe Benefits($22,737)($22,838)($22,941)  Expense & Equipment($17,206)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs - ($67,903)($59,366)($59,957)FTE Change1 FTE1 FTE1 FTECosts - DESE - to create and maintain 
a web based survey - §168.037  p. 32
(Could exceed
$100,000)($10,000)($10,000)
Costs - GR payment to schools that 
share a superintendent - §168.205.2(2)  
p. 32 – 33$0
$0 to 
(Could exceed 
$60,000)
$0 to 
(Could exceed 
$60,000)
Costs – DESE - expansion of career 
ladder criteria for admission and stage 
achievement - §168.515.2  p. 34
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
Costs - increased funding for Career 
Ladders program from forty percent to 
sixty percent - §168.515.2  p. 34
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to (Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050)
Costs - DESE - §170.018  p. 37  Personal Service($42,740)($51,801)($52,319)  Fringe Benefits($26,012)($31,400)($31,589)  Expense & Equipment($15,858)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs($84,610)($91,489)($92,402)FTE Change – DESE1 FTE1 FTE1 FTECosts - DESE - updates to the June 
Core Data/MOSIS cycle - §170.018 
 p. 37
($45,000)($6,000)($6,000)
Costs - curriculum development for 
responsible use of social media - 
§170.024  p. 37
($42,300)$0$0
Costs - DESE - §170.024  p. 37$0 or …$0 or …$0 or …  Personnel Service($41,780)($50,637)($51,144)  Fringe Benefits($25,663)($30,977)($31,162)  Expense & Equipment($15,858)($8,288)($8,494)Total Costs - ($83,301)($89,902)($90,800) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 58 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
FTE Change0 or 1 FTE0 or 1 FTE0 or 1 FTECosts - curriculum development 
meetings - §170.027 p. 52($24,760)$0$0
Costs - DESE - task force meetings - 
§170.036 p. 41($42,370)($42,370)$0
Costs - DESE- on-going evaluation 
and implementation of task force 
findings - §170.036  p. 41$0
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
Costs - meeting and administrative 
costs - §170.307  p. 43$0 or ($22,300)$0$0
Costs - DESE ITSD costs - §171.033  
p. 44
($11,491)($2,356)($2,415)Costs - DESE - establish and 
administer the Workforce Diploma 
Program - §173.831  p. 45$0 or …$0 or …$0 or …
   Personal Service($33,540)($40,650)($41,027)  Fringe Benefits($21,270)($25,659)($25,797)  Equipment and Expense($14,949)($7,403)($7,588)Total Costs($69,759)($73,712)($74,442)  FTE Change – DESE0 or 1 FTE0 or 1 FTE0 or 1 FTE
Transfer Out - DESE - to the 
Workforce Diploma Program Fund - 
§173.831  p. 44 - 45
$0 to (Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325)
$0 to (Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325)
$0 to (Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325)
Costs - DESE - §178.694  p. 47  Personnel Service$0($45,894)($46,356)  Fringe Benefits$0($29,255)($29,422)  Expense & Equipment$0($15,858)($8,494)Total Costs - $0($91,010)($84,272)FTE Change0 FTE1 FTE1 FTE L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 59 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Transfer Out - to the Imagination 
Library of Missouri Program Fund - 
§178.694  p. 47 - 48$0
($5,000,000) to 
Could exceed 
($9,252,275)
($5,000,000) to 
Could exceed 
($9,252,275)
Costs - annual meetings for literacy 
advisory council - §186.080  p. 48 ($44,600)($44,600)($44,600)ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO 
THE GENERAL REVENUE FUND
($2,103,815) to 
Could exceed 
($38,065,452)
($66,620,923) to 
Could exceed 
($106,883,089)
($6,061,045) to 
Could exceed 
($46,324,839)
Estimated Net FTE Change to the 
General Revenue Fund
5 FTE to could 
exceed 7.12 
FTE
6 FTE to could 
exceed 10.12 
FTE 
6 FTE to could 
exceed 10.12 
FTE
BUDGET STABILIZATION FUND 
(0522)
Transfer Out - to the Evidenced-based 
Reading Instruction - §161.241 p. 10($25,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Transfer Out - to the Competency-
based Education Grant Program Fund 
- §161.380  p. 11
($2,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE BUDGET STABILIZATION 
FUND 
($27,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
SCHOOL SAFETY PROGRAM 
FUND
Transfer In - from General Revenue - 
§160.671  p. 9$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Transfer Out - to eligible School 
Districts - §160.671  p. 9
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 60 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE SCHOOL SAFETY 
PROGRAM FUND
$0$0$0
EVIDENCE-BASED READING 
INSTRUCTION PROGRAM FUND
Transfer In - from General Revenue - 
§161.241.9 p. 10$0 
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Transfer In - from Budget 
Stabilization Fund - §161.241.9  p. 10$25,000,000$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Income - from gifts, bequests or 
donations - §161.241.9  p. 10
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Transfer Out - to School Districts and 
Charter Schools - for efforts to 
improve literacy - §161.241.9  p. 10
Could exceed
($25,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE EVIDENCE-BASED 
READING INSTRUCTION 
PROGRAM FUND
$0$0$0
COMPETENCY-BASED 
EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM 
FUND
Transfer In – from General Revenue - 
161.380 p. 11
$0 to 
Unknown
$0 to 
Unknown
$0 to 
Unknown
Transfer In - from the Budget 
Stabilization Fund §161.380  p. 11($2,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Income – gifts, contributions, grants 
and/or bequests - 161.380 p. 11
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 61 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Cost – Grants to School Districts – 
161.380 p. 11
Could exceed 
($2,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO 
THE COMPETENCY-BASED 
EDUCATION GRANT PROGRAM 
FUND
$0$0$0
LOTTERY FUNDCost Avoidance - denial of non-special 
education costs - §162.974  p. 19UnknownUnknownUnknown
Transfer Out - to High Need Fund - 
§162.974  p. 19
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
LOTTERY FUND
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
($8,416 or 
Unknown)
HIGH NEED FUNDTransfers In - from General Revenue - 
§162.974  p. 19
$17,087 or 
Unknown
$17,087 or 
Unknown
$17,087 or 
Unknown
Transfer In - from Lottery Fund - 
§162.974  p. 19 
$8,416 or 
Unknown
$8,416 or 
Unknown
$8,416 or 
Unknown
Savings - denial of non-special 
education costs - §162.974  p. 19UnknownUnknownUnknown
Cost - increase in eligible costs - 
§162.974  p. 19
($25,503 or 
Unknown)
($25,503 or 
Unknown)
($25,503 or 
Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
HIGH NEED FUND$0$0$0 L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 62 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
PARENT PUBLIC SCHOOL 
CHOICE FUND
Transfer In – from General Revenue - 
§167.1212   p. 24
$0$60,000,000$0 or UnknownExpenditures – to school districts to 
support the Public School Open 
Enrollment Program - §167.1212  p. 
24
$0($60,000,000)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT TO 
THE PARENT PUBLIC SCHOOL 
CHOICE FUND$0$0$0
CRIMINAL RECORD SYSTEM 
FUND (0671)
Income – MHP – potential increase in 
fees for multiple school designations - 
§168.036 
$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Costs - DPS-MHP - Missouri 
Automated Criminal History System 
modifications - §168.036   ($165,000)$0$0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
CRIMINAL RECORD SYSTEM 
FUND
Up to 
($165,000)
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
EXCELLENCE IN EDUCATION 
REVOLVING FUND 
Transfer In - from General Revenue - 
for expansion of career ladder 
eligibility criteria - §168.515.2 – p. 34
$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 63 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Transfer In - from General Revenue - 
increased funding for Career Ladders 
program at sixty percent - §168.515.2  
p. 34 
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
Transfer Out - to the Career Ladder 
Forward Funding Fund - increased 
funding for Career Ladders program 
from forty percent to sixty percent - 
§168.515.2  p. 34 
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE EXCELLENCE IN 
EDUCATION REVOLVING FUND$0$0$0
CAREER LADDER FORWARD 
FUNDING FUND
Transfer In - from Revolving Fund - 
for expansion of career ladder 
eligibility criteria - §168.515.2
$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Transfer In - from Revolving Fund - 
increased funding for Career Ladders 
program at sixty percent - §168.515.2 
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
Transfer Out - to School Districts - 
increased funding for Career Ladders 
program from forty percent to sixty 
percent - §168.515.2 
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
$0 to 
(Unknown, 
Could exceed 
$18,733,050)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE CAREER LADDER 
FORWARD FUNDING FUND$0$0$0
COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY 
FUNDS L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 64 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Cost – supplies and equipment to print 
cards to adhere to §173.1200 
$0 or 
(Unknown)$0$0
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY 
FUNDS
$0 or 
(Unknown)$0$0
WORKFORCE DIPLOMA 
PROGRAM FUNDTransfer In - from General Revenue - 
§173.831 
$2,000,000
$0 to Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325
$0 to Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325
Income - from gifts and bequests -
§173.831 $0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Costs - DESE - reimbursements to 
program providers for qualifying 
student milestones - §173.831($2,000,000)
$0 to (Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325)
$0 to (Unknown 
Could exceed 
$4,928,550 to 
$14,787,325)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE WORKFORCE DIPLOMA 
PROGRAM FUND$0$0$0
IMAGINATION LIBRARY OF 
MISSOURI PROGRAM FUND L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 65 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Transfer In - from General Revenue - 
§178.694 $0
$5,000,000 to 
Could exceed 
$9,252,275
$5,000,000 to 
Could exceed 
$9,252,275
Income - from gifts, bequests, grants 
or donations - §178.694 $0$0 or Unknown$0 or UnknownTransfer Out - to reimburse school 
districts - §178.694 $0
($5,000,000) to 
Could exceed 
($9,252,275)
($5,000,000) to 
Could exceed 
($9,252,275)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
THE IMAGINATION LIBRARY 
OF MISSOURI PROGRAM FUND
$0$0$0
FEDERAL FUNDSIncome – DSS - §160.261 - p.5$0 to $63,349$0 to $72,035$0 to $72,719Costs - DSS - §160.261 - p.5$0 to …$0 to …$0 to …  Personnel Service($34,380)($41,668)($42,085)  Fringe Benefits($22,375)($26,988)($27,128)  Expense & Equipment($8,988)($6,279)($6,435)Total Costs - DSS($65,743)($74,935)($75,648)FTE Change.88 FTE.88 FTE.88 FTECosts - meeting costs §170.307$0 or ($22,300)$0$0ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
FEDERAL FUNDS$0 or ($22,300)$0$0
Estimated Net FTE Change on Federal 
Funds
0 to .88 FTE 0 to .88 FTE 0 to .88 FTE  L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 66 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
FISCAL IMPACT – Local GovernmentFY 2023
(10 Mo.)
FY 2024FY 2025LOCAL POLITICAL 
SUBDIVISIONS
Cost – locals reporting to the Missouri 
Accountability Portal
§37.850 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
Costs - School Districts - for annual 
curriculum review - §160.516 (Unknown)(Unknown)(Unknown)
Costs - School Districts - inform and 
assist students/parents who want to 
participate in extended learning 
opportunities - §160.565 
$0(Unknown)(Unknown)
Revenue Gain - distributions from the 
School Safety Program Fund - 
§160.671$0$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Costs - School Districts - to implement 
School Innovation Waivers (improve 
student readiness and job training, 
increase teacher compensation, improve 
teacher recruitment and development) - 
§161.214 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Revenue - School Districts - 
distributions to support school districts 
implementing School Innovation 
Waivers - §161.214 
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or
 Unknown
Transfer In - from the Evidence-Based 
Reading Instruction Program Fund to 
School Districts - §161.241.9 $25,000,000
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Income - grants from DESE - §161.380
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Costs - implementing competency-
based education program - §161.380$2,000,000
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 67 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Costs - School Districts - to keep 
records of incidents and inform parents 
§161.1050 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - legal costs if parents bring a 
cause of action - §162.005.4
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Loss – potential for funding withheld 
for violating section - §162.005.4
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Gain – potential for funding returned to 
school districts and charter schools for 
establishing compliance - §162.005.4
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Costs - School Boards/School Districts 
- to implement community engagement 
policies and add agenda items from 
residents of a district - §162.058 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - School Districts - to notify 
parents of performance scores and goals 
- §162.084 
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
$0 to
(Unknown)
Costs - Election Authorities - for 
redistricting and conducting elections - 
§162.563 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Cost - School Districts - requirement to 
establish gifted programs - §162.720 - $0 $0 
$0 to could 
exceed  
($6,888,675) 
Costs - School Districts - additional 
costs for shifting the burden of proof 
and production - §162.961  (Unknown) (Unknown) (Unknown)
Loss - School Districts - denial of non-
special education costs - §162.974 - (Unknown)(Unknown)(Unknown) L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 68 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Revenue - School Districts - increase in 
eligible costs - §162.974 
$25,503 or 
Unknown
$25,503 or 
Unknown
$25,503 or 
Unknown
Transfer In - Increased formula funding 
to Gasconade County R-II, Maries 
County R-II, Bismarck R-V and the 
West St. Francois County R-IV school 
district from other school districts or 
GR - §163.016 
$0 to 
$2,165,902
$0 to 
$2,165,902
$0 to 
$2,165,902
Loss - from transferring 80% of state 
and local dollars to residential treatment 
facilities - §163.063
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Nonresident Districts  - additional State 
funding for non-resident transfers but 
also additional costs to educate those 
students - §167.1205, §167.1210 & 
§167.151
$0Unknown or 
(Unknown)
Unknown or 
(Unknown)
Resident Districts – reduced state 
funding, but also possible reduction in 
costs to educate those students - 
§167.1205, §167.1210 & §167.151
$0
(Unknown) or 
Unknown
(Unknown) or 
Unknown
Costs - School Districts - orientation 
and mobility evaluations and 
instruction, eye reports, duplicative 
accessible assistive technology - 
§167.225 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs – to train employees and to 
administer the provisions of Will’s Law 
- §167.625
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Revenue Gain - School Districts - 
increased call to the foundation formula 
for remediation hours outside of the 
traditional school day - §167.640
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 69 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Costs - School Districts - reading 
success plans and reading intervention 
for students - §167.640 & §167.645 - 
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
Cost avoidance - School Districts - 
savings from transferring students now 
to attend recovery high schools - 
§167.850 
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Costs - School Districts - payments to 
recovery high schools - §167.850 - 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Costs - Recovery High Schools - cost to 
educate students - §167.850 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Revenue - Recovery High School - 
payments from public schools and/or 
other state(s)  - §167.850 
$0 or 
Unknown
$0 or
Unknown
$0 or 
Unknown
Costs/Savings - School 
Districts/Community Colleges - from 
an unknown impact on employer 
contribution rates - §168.036.6
$0 or 
(Unknown) to 
Unknown
$0 or
(Unknown) to 
Unknown
$0 or
(Unknown) to 
Unknown
Costs - School Districts & Charter 
Schools - substitute teacher data 
collection - §168.037 
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
$0 or 
(Unknown)
Revenue Gain - School Districts - state 
payment to schools that share a 
superintendent - §168.205.2(2) $0
$0 to 
Could exceed 
$60,000
$0 to 
Could exceed 
$60,000
Revenue Gain - School Districts - for 
expansion of career ladder eligibility 
criteria - §168.515.2 
$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown$0 or Unknown
Revenue Gain - School Districts - 
increased funding for Career Ladders 
program from forty percent to sixty 
percent - §168.515.2 
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050
$0 to Could 
exceed 
$18,733,050 L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 70 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Cost Avoidance - reduction in 
actuarially determined contribution - 
§169.070$0$11,000,000$10,000,000
Costs - School Districts - to expand 
reading programs to grade five - 
§170.014 (Unknown)(Unknown)(Unknown)
Costs - School Districts - to offer 
computer science course - §170.018 $0(Unknown)(Unknown)
Costs - to offer a driver education 
course - §170.027$0(Unknown)(Unknown)
Costs - School Districts - materials, 
assessments and teacher time to 
implement cursive writing - §170.025 
(Less than 
$2,739,933)
(Less than 
$2,739,933)
(Less than 
$2,739,933)
Cost – School Districts - supplies and 
equipment to print cards to adhere to 
§170.048 
$0 or 
(Unknown)$0$0
Savings - School Districts - from reduce 
transportation costs, hourly wages or 
food service costs - §171.033 
$0 to
 Unknown
$0 to
 Unknown
$0 to
 Unknown
Transfer In - School Districts - from the 
Imagination Library of Missouri 
Program Fund - §178.694 $0
$5,000,000 to 
Could exceed 
$9,252,275
$5,000,000 to 
Could exceed 
$9,252,275
Costs - School Districts - to provide 
reading selections to children birth to 
five - §178.694 $0
(Could exceed 
$9,252,275)
(Could exceed 
$9,252,275)
ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON 
LOCAL POLITICAL 
SUBDIVISIONS
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
(Unknown, 
Potentially 
significant)
FISCAL IMPACT – Small Business
No direct fiscal impact to small businesses would be expected as a result of this proposal. L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 71 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
FISCAL DESCRIPTION
This proposal modifies provisions relating to elementary and secondary education, with an 
emergency clause for a certain section (168.036).
This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not 
require additional capital improvements or rental space.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Attorney General’s Office
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Department of Public Safety - Missouri Highway Patrol
Office of Administration
Budget and Planning
Accounting Division
Information Technology
Department of Social Services
Administrative Hearing Commission
Office of the State Courts Administrator
Office of the State Treasurer
Department of Mental Health
Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement
Office of the Secretary of State
Joint Committee on Administrative Rules
Missouri Senate
Missouri House of Representatives
Office of the Governor
Department of Public Safety
Missouri Highway Patrol
Director’s Office
Public Schools and Education Employee Retirement Systems
City of St. Louis
Jackson County Election Board
Platte County Election Board
St. Louis County Election Board
Kansas City Election Board
City of Claycomo
City of O’Fallon
Sedalia School District 200
Southeast Missouri State University - Charter School Sponsor
Gordon Parks Elementary L.R. No. 4133S.12S 
Bill No. CCS for HCS for SS for SCS for SBs 681 & 662  
Page 72 of 72
May 6, 2022
JLH:LR:OD
Sikeston R-6 School District
Fordland School District 
High Point R-III School District
Springfield Public Schools
Lee’s Summit R-7 School District
Wellsville-Middletown R-I School District
Fayette R-III School District
Shell Knob School District
Hurley R-I School District
Taneyville R-II School District
Republic School District
Dallas County R-I School District
Affton 101 School District
Marquand-Zion R-VI School District
Malta Bend R-V School District
Park Hill School District 
Bowling Green School District
Gasconade County R-II School District
Missouri State University
Northwest Missouri State University
State Technical College of Missouri
University of Central Missouri
St. Charles Community College
Normandy Schools Collaborative
Phelps County Sheriff
Kansas City Police Department
St. Louis County Police Department
Kansas City Public Schools
North Kansas City School District
Julie MorffRoss StropeDirectorAssistant DirectorMay 6, 2022May 6, 2022