MAEP; determine cost of using Average Daily Membership (ADM) in lieu of ADA with 90% threshold attendance trigger.
One of the key impacts of HB 1686 is that it aims to create a standardized method for determining the funding that public schools receive from the state's educational budget. By basing funding on the average daily membership rather than average daily attendance, the bill seeks to ensure that schools receive adequate funding even when there are fluctuations in attendance. It also emphasizes the importance of accurate reporting of student enrollments, which could influence the financial stability of school districts. More significantly, districts that do not meet threshold attendance requirements could face reductions in their funding, thereby incentivizing districts to improve their attendance rates.
House Bill 1686 proposes amendments to various sections of the Mississippi Code of 1972 pertaining to the Mississippi Adequate Education Program (MAEP). The bill defines the term 'average daily membership (ADM),' which is crucial for determining the funding necessary for school districts. The legislation outlines how the basic cost of education will be calculated based on ADM and introduces provisions for adjustments, reflecting changes in student population counts collected by a state auditor. This establishes a more consistent basis for allocating educational funds across districts based on their respective average daily memberships.
The bill has raised some concerns, particularly regarding how the changes to attendance definitions may place additional pressures on schools and parents alike. Critics argue that redefining attendance in such a manner could disadvantage schools with natural fluctuations in student populations or those in economically disadvantaged areas. Furthermore, there may be contention around the potential for increased oversight from the state regarding attendance reporting, as school officials might feel burdened by the need to comply with strict reporting standards. Overall, while there are anticipated efficiencies, the legislative changes could lead to lobbying from various educational factions seeking amendments favoring local control and flexibility.