HCS HB 827 -- CHILDREN IN LICENSED RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES

SPONSOR:  Muschany

COMMITTEE ACTION:  Voted "do pass" by the Special Committee on
Student Achievement by a vote of 8 to 0.

This substitute requires that the educational needs of certain
children committed to the guardianship of the Department of
Social Services are to be considered by the child's family
support team.  When a child who is not receiving special
education services is placed in a licensed residential care
facility by the department, the facility is responsible for the
child's educational services, unless the child's plan of
treatment indicates that the child is able to attend public
school.  The substitute addresses the use of homebound
instruction; alternative settings; and reimbursement for
educational services for facilities with their own school and
staff, facilities with their own school room using school
district staff, and facilities with neither school facilities nor
teachers of their own.

Any child under the care of a facility whose plan of treatment
supports attendance at a public school but who subsequently is
suspended or otherwise demonstrates school failure will receive
educational services as described in the substitute.

Facilities with schools on site may contract with the local
school district to provide educational services at the facility,
and districts may contract with facilities to provide services.
Residential care facilities are not obligated to create an on-
site school.

FISCAL NOTE:  No impact on General Revenue Fund in FY 2008,
FY 2009, and FY 2010.  Estimated Cost on Other State Funds of
$2,353,950 in FY 2008, FY 2009, and FY 2010.

PROPONENTS:  Supporters say that traditionally, arrangements
between treatment facilities and the school district have been
worked out locally; but when administrations change, the
arrangements may collapse.  Frequently, children receive less
than a full school day through homebound instruction or must
attend the local school when they are not emotionally ready.  The
bill gives guidelines for three types of arrangements, attempting
to keep as close as possible to existing practices.

Testifying for the bill were Representative Muschany; Doug
Zimmerman, Ozanam; Matthew Ramsey, Gillis Center; Susan Fillmore,
Crittenton Children's Center; Missouri Coalition of Children's
Agencies; and Missouri National Education Association.

OPPONENTS:  Those who oppose the bill say that it transfers the
educational authority to the facility and leaves the cost to the
school district.

Testifying against the bill were George Wilson, Missouri School
Boards' Association and Missouri Council of Administrators of
Special Education; and Missouri Council of School
Administrators/School Administrators Coalition.

OTHERS:  Others testifying on the bill say children are entitled
to a free and appropriate public education in the least
restrictive environment, but the environment may change over the
course of a child's treatment.  A child's emotional health and
education shouldn't be at odds with each other.

Testifying on the bill was Representative Fares.

Missouri House of Representatives
94th General Assembly, 1st Regular Session
Last Updated July 25, 2007 at 11:20 am