Education Committee - Senate and House
Video
Transcript
6 documents
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin
- Processing date
- October 5, 2026
Unknown speaker
0:00
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Senator Jane English
Unverified
5:00
Good afternoon, and welcome to the House and Senate Education committee and we have a busy day here today our thing first thing on the agenda is a motion to
approve our minutes from february the 20th february the 2nd and february the 3rd do i hear a motion thank you all in favor all opposed thank you very much um okay we have a isp request here
An interim study proposal, so Representative Vaught, are you going to present this?
Speaker 6
6:28
Ma'am, I have some guests. May they please come to the table? Yeah, that'd be fine. Emily, is
Speaker 9
6:42
this on? You'll each have to individually introduce yourselves. Oh, is that where I get the people? Oh, they come out here. Got it. Can
Speaker 14
6:51
I get one more chair? I have to have this every time. That's fine.
Senator Jane English
Unverified
6:58
so if you all would identify yourselves you will be recognized
Speaker 18
7:16
Brian Marsh Goodwill Industries of Arkansas president CEO Edie Stewart
Speaker 19
7:21
chief mission officer senior vice president Google industries of Arkansas. Sarah
Speaker 23
7:27
Thomas, Senior Director of the Excelsa International Office with Goodwill
Speaker 24
7:31
Education Initiatives. Hi, I'm Rachel Fulcher Dawson. I'm at the Lab for Economic Opportunities, Leo, at the University of Notre Dame. I serve as the
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
7:43
Managing Director and Head of Impact. Dan Vought, District 87, and I'm setting in for Representative Lee Johnson. Today he had some business where he couldn't get away from it so he asked me to please present this and if it's okay ma'am I'm gonna go ahead and let them speak to the ISP fine
Speaker 20
8:03
chair and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about Arkansas's adult education landscape and
Speaker 32
8:12
the urgent need to expand viable pathways Arkansas consent continues to face a significant statewide education barrier. Approximately 10 to 11 percent of Arkansans over the age of 19 do not have a high school diploma or GED, a rate that places our state among the lowest nationally. In simpler terms, more than 300,000 Arkansans, approximately the combined population of Fayetteville,
Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville combined, lack a high school diploma or GED. The consequences are well documented, lower workforce participation, lower lifetime earnings, and an increased strain on families and communities. Adults without a diploma face major barriers to stable employment and economic mobility. These challenges compound a statewide workforce problem that impacts our competitiveness and economic growth.
While the GED attainment remains an opportunity, it is not a solution that works for everyone. A test alone cannot make up for years of interrupted learning, and for many, that simply isn't a realistic path. Arkansas needs multiple pathways to adult high school completion, and one of the most promising, proven solutions is already here, the Excel Center. A little history on the Excel Center. It is operated by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas as the state's first and only public adult
charter, made possible after Arkansas passed legislation in 2015, enabling adults 19 years and older the opportunity to earn a high school diploma. The first Excel Center opened in October in Little Rock, offering adults an alternative path to relying solely on a GED option. This model was designed specifically for adults whose life circumstances, learning needs, or prior educational experiences made the GED pathway insufficient or unattainable, especially due to low literacy rates.
Since opening, the Excel Center has graduated more than 350 adults. with Arkansas' state-certified high school diploma. In 2013, we expanded to include a second location in Springdale, increasing the capacity for goodwill to serve Arkansans in northwest Arkansas. There are 51 Excel centers across the nation, and 49 operate through a combination of state education funding, adult education appropriations, and workforce dollars.
Arkansas's two schools stand alone. The Excel Center in Arkansas is not state-funded and relies entirely on Goodwill Industries of Arkansas to operate. Expansion into additional high schools in high-need regions of the state with high concentrations of adults without a high school diploma is not possible under the current funding constraints. Goodwill Arkansas funds 100% of the operating costs, which includes licensed teachers and facilities,
our wraparound services that include child care, life coaching staff, and transportation assistance, career services. Arkansas workforce challenges require a range of adult education options. The Excel Center is a proven, outcomes-driven model that strengthens families economically, supports employer demand for credentialed workforce, and reduces dependency, burdens on public assistance, and breaks intergenerational poverty cycles.
The Excel Center is not the only solution, but it is a critical one. It complements GED programs serving Arkansans who need different learning model, more support, greater flexibility to succeed. It offers a roadmap that transforms lives, strengthens households, and bolsters the workforce that Arkansas
Speaker 20
12:16
needs. Edie Stewart will now share more about the two Excel centers. Good afternoon. Wanted
Speaker 19
12:22
to tell you a little bit more about the Excel Center Charter High School here in Arkansas.
It provides year-round, accelerated, eight-week terms, free on-site child care, life coaches, tutoring, and transportation support. These services are specifically designed to remove barriers that hinder adults from completing their high school education. today arkansas's two excel centers springdale and little rock stand as the only accredited public charter high schools in the state designed exclusively for adults 19 and above
the excel center provides a diploma-based model which is often a better fit for adult learners who better benefit from in-person classroom instruction the ged is a test-based credential and success requires a 9th through 12th grade reading level. However, many of our Excel Center students come to us with only a 4th to 5th grade reading level. More than 50% of our graduates become the first in their families to earn a high school diploma, breaking the cycle of low educational attainment.
Children of graduates are less likely to drop out of high school and are 50% more likely to be proficient in reading and math. Many students moved directly from high school completion into industry-recognized certifications at the Academy of Goodwill, building a direct pipeline into Arkansas's high-demand fields. Recent Excel Center reporting shows high retention at 86%, strong academic credit completion with nearly 4,500 credits earned last year, growing enrollment from 185 in 2018 to a record 675 in 2025.
And a few demographics to touch on. 77% of our students are female, many with children. 49% are Hispanic, 33% African American, 15% white, with a median age of 34. To clarify, Arkansas Excel Center Network is a public charter high school that falls under the jurisdiction of the Arkansas Department of Education. Arkansas Excel is an active participant in the National Excel Network, comprised of 51 Excel centers across the U.S., and in fact, we are thrilled to have been asked to host the Excel Center National Conference right here in Little Rock in May.
Again, adults unable to pass the GED or for those that a test-centered model is not effective, the Excel Center offers a full academic environment with licensed teachers, including special education teachers and ESL. Also providing high-intensity tutoring and support that leads to a true high school diploma. We follow all state regulations, including the recent Bell to Bell No Cell Act. I'd like to close by telling y'all about a recent Excel Center graduate named Caitlin.
Caitlin's story began like far too many others in our state. She dropped out of high school at 16 when she became pregnant. For more than a decade, Caitlin worked hard to provide for her family, but every opportunity she pursued required a high school diploma. At 28, after yet another job rejection, she knew it wasn't about her ability, but rather it was the lack of a high school diploma. And it was then that she walked through the doors of the Excel Center. There, every barrier that had held her back previously was removed.
She had free child care for her kiddos. She had bus passes to get her to and from home and school. She had a life coach that believed in her, even when she did not believe in herself. Caitlin earned her diploma. She rediscovered her confidence and her purpose. She had always dreamed of working in health care, and with the help of her life coach at the Excel Center, she enrolled in the Certified Clinical Medical Assistant Program at the Academy at Goodwill. As with every Excel Center student who wants to pursue a certification,
she received a scholarship where every single expense, curriculum, scrubs, all of her exam fees were fully covered. She passed with flying colors. With the aid of Goodwill's career services, she was offered a medical assistant position at Arkansas Children's Hospital. Caitlin didn't stop there, though. She recently completed a pediatric ophthalmology certification through Children's Hospital and earned a promotion. Today, she is building a career that she once thought impossible, and her children are watching a new cycle of achievement and hope take root.
Caitlin's story is not an exception. It is an example of what becomes possible when adult learners are given a real supported pathway to a diploma and a career. The Excel Center is not just granting diplomas, it is rewriting family trajectories and strengthening Arkansas's workforce in the process. Thank you all so much for your time, and I'd like to now turn it over to Rachel Dawson with the University of Notre Dame. Committee members, thank
Speaker 24
17:36
you all for having me here today.
I'm honored to be able to share with you about my lab's research and our work with the Goodwill Excel Centers. Leo, our lab, works across the country to find promising programs. We conduct the most rigorous research on the impact of these programs, and then we take those results and get them used by providers, by policymakers like yourselves, and other key stakeholders across the country. We currently work with over 120 partners in over 30 states. Sometimes our research
shows that a program works, and that can lead to scale-up and broad impact. Sometimes our research shows that a program is not effective, and that can lead to program improvement or reallocation of resources. Either way, we publish what we find, committed to understanding program impact and getting that information used to help improve lives and reduce poverty. We do not charge for our services, and because of this, we remain independent evaluators.
Our researchers conducted a study of the Goodwill Excel Center in central Indiana beginning in 2018. Our study looked at the impact of the program on students who completed the program, so they graduated from an Excel Center with a high school diploma, compared to students who were offered the program and didn't enroll or didn't complete it. What we found was significant positive impact in the following ways. Excel Center graduates are 12% more likely to be employed.
Graduates have higher earnings. They see a 38% increase in earnings. Graduates have more career opportunities. They are over 50% more likely to be employed in the health care sector and retail pharmacy. allowing them for greater upward mobility. Graduates are also 43% more likely to earn certificates than their peers and 21% more likely to earn college credits. More recently, we were able to extend our analysis to look at the impact of the Excel Centers
on criminal justice outcomes, and we found that participants saw a 49% decline in criminal charges in the first year, and this persists for at least five years after graduation these results frankly speaking were not expected and are quite impressive one way to demonstrate this is to look at the return on investment of Excel centers here we find that when you just look at the employment outcomes for every $1 spent we see over $20 in benefits when
you add in these criminal justice outcomes the benefits become even higher so for every $1 spent on the Excel Center we see $60 in benefits. The market doesn't do these kind of returns by the way. So how does this compare to other workforce programs? Using the marginal value of public funds or MVPF methodology, which is kind of a mouthful but essentially means dividing the benefits that a policy provides to its recipients, so in this case Excel Center students, by the
policy's net cost to the government, things like increased taxes paid by recipients because they have higher earnings. Again, we look at the Excel Center's return on investment of 20 to 1 compared to a typical MVPF or return on investment for a typical job training program which is 0.44, less than 1. So usually you get less than a dollar return for these kinds of programs, but at Excel Center, we're seeing $20. Unemployment insurance returns are also
less than one at 0.61 on average. When we add in the criminal justice benefits, which include things like the reduced cost of court contact and the reduced social cost of crime, usually to crime victims, the Excel Center ROI further dwarfs these comparisons with the $60 benefit for every $1 invested. From our perspective at LEO, the Excel Center has proven impact to their program on employment,
on earnings, and criminal justice involvement, and has a comparatively high ROI. I thank you for your time and welcome questions. Good afternoon, committee
Speaker 23
22:04
members. Thank you so much for having me here. I am thrilled to see Arkansas leaders considering how to expand upon the already great work of the Excel Center happening here in your state. The Excel Center strengthens communities by ensuring adults who want to work have a clear and efficient path to finish their education and reenter the local economy at full strength.
As a public high school model backed by research, the Excel Center turns persistence and hard work into measurable community results. Graduates boost local economies. Is it possible you move
Senator Jane English
Unverified
22:38
your chair up just a little bit, a little bit closer to your
Speaker 23
22:43
microphone? Yes. Is that better? That's better. Thank you. Graduates boost local economies, they rely less on public assistance, and they inspire the next generation to aim higher. The Excel Center is an investment in family well-being and community excellence where
opportunity, effort, and dignity work together to build lasting prosperity in our graduates' homes and their communities. The Excel Center National Network comprises 51 campuses across 13 states and Washington, D.C. Last year, 87% of graduates from our schools earned not only their high school diploma, but also industry certifications and dual college credit. Our ultimate goal at the Excel Center is for students to land good jobs, filling workforce demands, and earning benefits and opportunities for growth.
Every state where we operate, the Excel Center provides funding to support the school except for the state of Arkansas. Despite that, the two campuses here are some of our highest performing across the network. They perform well in retention, attendance, and college and career readiness. The certifications offered to students in Arkansas have some of the highest quality in our network. Students have options like pharmacy technician, welding,
certified medical assistant. You heard Rachel talking about the studies that have been done. We see our students moving out of the service industry and into higher-paying fields, such as health care. This is definitely playing out here in Arkansas. As members of the national network, the educators who work at your schools here have access to high-quality professional development from our network. That includes learning labs, positional huddles where they can work with their peers across the country to share best practices and problem-solve, and our national conference.
As you heard, we'll be here in May, hosting our national conference right here in Little Rock. And we're excited for our educators across the country to come learn from the work that's happening here in Arkansas. Every diploma earned through the Excel Center strengthens a household, a workplace, and a hometown. So I strongly urge you to consider supporting the Excel Center in expansion attempts across the state. I'm going to pass back
Speaker 32
25:02
to you. And to wrap up, there's a critical need for adult education in our state.
This is not a small-scale issue. It is a statewide challenge. As stated, more than 300,000 adults in the state of Arkansas do not have a high school diploma. People working hard to provide for their families, but too often locked out of higher-paying jobs and training programs. Many of these Arkansans left high school because life got in the way. teen pregnancy, financial strain, unstable home environments, frequent moves, or legal troubles. Some have tried to earn a GED but found the process too difficult.
Roughly half the students who walk through the doors of the Goodwill Excel Center have already tried and failed the GED exam several times. A test alone cannot make up for years of interrupted learning, and for many, it's simply not a realistic path. A state-certified high school diploma is different. It's the same credential traditional high school students earn. Issued by the Arkansas Department of Education, it carries more weight with employers and post-secondary institutions.
And as you've heard from Rachel, University of Notre Dame's Lab for Economic Opportunities shows that people with a diploma earn significantly more than those without one or even with a GED. As we shape the future of adult education in Arkansas, we cannot afford to limit the potential of our people. We must champion multiple pathways, including diploma-granting high schools, so every Arkansan has the opportunity to finish their education,
uplift their family, and drive our state's prosperity forward to ignite financial transformation. Thank you for your attention and your commitment to Arkansas as adult learners. Thank you very much. So, Senator
Senator Jane English
Unverified
27:01
Sullivan. You know, I'm sitting back here and I'm a
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
27:08
little, I take issue with some of the things you say. You started your
comments out by Arkansas is one of the worst in the nation, if not the worst.
Number one, I think you said. I don't have the exact statement. When we are right in the middle of some of the most progressive, innovative programs in the nation with access and learns, the example, and I'm kind of wondering how much of this is the fault of the state and how much of that responsibility falls to the individual. The point you made about an individual you said had all these learning problems and you said life gets in the way.
You know, that is not the fault of the state, that life gets in the way necessarily. But by your opening statement, it seems like that we are really at fault. Again, we are one of the most progressive, forward-moving states in the nation. I think teacher pay was one of them. Some of the things with learns and access, so I'm not opposed to your study at all. I think it's really Necessary and a good thing. I think you close with every Arkansan has an opportunity
Every Arkansan does have an opportunity now. This is not new And again, I think we've made huge progress in that so I'm a little I don't know what I am. I'm not very happy with the fact that we start out asking the legislature to approve a program when you tell us we're last and worst in the nation. So when
life gets in the way, how much of the problems that we're having in adult education
are due to the state and due to shortcomings of the consumer? That'd be
Speaker 30
29:07
the question. Thank you, Senator Sullivan. I
Speaker 20
29:11
appreciate that. The point I made was just a statement of the number of adults without a high school diploma as a portion of our adult population. Well,
Speaker 32
29:19
I'm telling you what I understood you to say. Okay.
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
29:23
That's the way I took it. You can say it however you want to say it. I'm kind
of tired of people coming in front of this body and telling us how bad we are or how bad the state is.
And then you go on to explain and your group goes on to explain how you can help the people who have, according to your last statement, missed the opportunity. The opportunity is there. Would you agree with the state the opportunity is
Speaker 32
29:54
there? The opportunity for these adults who did not gain their high school diploma by age
Speaker 20
30:00
19 and have gone beyond that have very limited opportunities for an education and to attain a high school diploma in the state.
The one opportunity they have for a high school diploma is the Goodwill Excel Center. That is the opportunity they have. The other opportunity that they have is the GED, which is an equivalency diploma, which is just a test. But they don't read at a grade point level that allows them to pass that test. That was the
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
30:30
statement I was making. Okay, so again, if the key word there is opportunity, if the opportunity is there at the state,
I mean, right now we're holding students back to third grade to get them to read. We're working at the very things you're talking about, and I just, again, it's concerning to me that we talk about these things without recognizing the critical events that are happening in the state of Arkansas, and with that, I close. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you.
Representative David Ray
Unverified
31:06
Representative Ray? Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. So I have just a couple of questions and comments maybe to piggyback on the presentation.
The first thing is, this is an area that I've done some work in previously. And so I'm always shocked when I hear this number that there's 300,000 adults in the state of Arkansas that don't have a high school diploma. And if you think about that, sometimes when we look at whole numbers, we don't see it in context. But if you look at our population as a state, what we're saying is basically one out of every 10 Arkansans is an adult that does not have the most basic education credential required to compete in the workplace.
And that is striking to me. So one of the things that, you know, I've noticed as I've tried to learn a little bit more about this field is that, you know, we invest as a state. We spend a lot of money on adult ed. I think it's like $20 million a year. But one of the things that I love about what you guys do at the Excel Center and others is that, you know, y'all are not a government-run entity.
You're a nonprofit. And so you're mission-focused and you're vision-focused. And there's for-profit companies that operate in this space, too, and they obviously have profit motive. And there are a lot of incentives that lead to better outcomes when you have competition. So I'm wondering if you can speak, if one of you could speak to the role that the mission and vision of Goodwill plays in what you do. Thank you, Representative Ray.
Speaker 20
32:53
Goodwill's mission, our mission statement is changing lives through education, training, and employment. the foundation for that is education we believe that with an education and the proper tools and the access to the opportunity individuals can then set their own path and so goodwill we are a non-profit we are one of 140 goodwills in the u.s only 15 goodwills are all of a state so we are
blessed and also slightly burdened by our organization is responsible for serving the state of Arkansas. We're working to identify opportunities to offer the Excel Center experience and that opportunity to people across the state. Right now we're limited on that to the two campuses that we operate but it is it is absolutely about connecting people with those opportunities so that they can change that pathway. Yeah thank you for that. The other thing
Representative David Ray
Unverified
33:55
I wanted to ask you about is
you mentioned some of the wraparound services that
you provide and I think this gets to the point that I made about the distinction between having just sort of a state-run one-size-fits-all model and sort of unique providers that are in the non-profit or for-profit space in addition to what the state provides you mentioned specifically child care and transportation can you just elaborate a little bit on what that looks like absolutely thank you so much for that
Speaker 19
34:28
one of the things that does set the excel center apart is that piece of free child care we know that child care is you know a barrier for many individuals in our state whether it's to go to school or to go to work and we have done our best to remove as many barriers as possible and that includes the big one of child care so we do offer free child care for all students on both campuses we offer transportation vouchers I
mentioned in talking about the student Caitlin our recent graduate that was a game-changer for her because she you know had bus passes to get back and forth to campus. Other wraparound services that we provide are that career piece because as Brian mentioned, our mission is changing lives through education, training, and employment. So our goal is employment and entry into the workforce. So those wraparound services are provided that include
resume creation, mock interviews in the field that they've chosen, those types of things in order to get them that job that they, or career that they're dreaming of. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate your answer there. And,
Representative David Ray
Unverified
35:44
and just to close out on Senator Sullivan's comments, I agree with a lot of what he said, and I am in agreement with him on the transformative nature of what we're doing with learns and with, with access and all of that. I just want to just kind of point out just for the
benefit of the committee that the population group that that you guys are focused on serving are adults these are people who for whatever reason whether it was a teenage pregnancy whether it was a high school kid that had to be a caregiver in their home they didn't make it through the system maybe they were in a bad they were maybe they were in a completely dysfunctional school district when they were going through high school and you guys are trying to come back along and attack this workforce problem from the other end of the spectrum. So I appreciate what you all do.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
36:35
Thank you. Senator Flowers? Yes. This is a
proposed interim study proposal, and I would think we'd want to adopt the ISP before going forward with all this testimony and I would make a motion to adopt do I hear a second
Senator Jane English
Unverified
37:14
second all in favor all opposed okay thank you we will consider this
Senator Love I just had
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
37:53
know what I'm not on the committee and so I think you all need to
Speaker 70
38:02
redo that vote just just a point of order I'm sorry thank you representative Brown well if
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
38:12
we're going to redo it I
still have a question so how fun to get in the line well I
Senator Jane English
Unverified
38:19
think that's the purpose of the interim study so we can ask ask all the questions and begin to look at it as a proposal for the next session. I just was curious about some
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
38:28
of the numbers. That's okay. I'm sure there'll be a discussion about that. Representative Duke. Thank you,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
38:44
Madam Chair. I guess I have a question in when we're doing the
interim study proposal and they present and we're going to vote on whether we're going to move forward with a proposal or not but we don't get to ask a question that might help clarify how we want to vote on
Senator Jane English
Unverified
39:03
that well normally we don't normally we don't have a huge great huge discussion this is worthwhile discussion but we don't usually have a this kind of a discussion it goes into the interim proposal and that discussion around that okay it just seems a little interesting that we
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
39:20
vote on something but we can't ask questions about it before we vote on it to decide if maybe we would
support it the assumption is that we're going to support it which I mean it's fine I guess it just I had a question that was a little bit relevant to me on I mean it was this is a numbers question but was not afforded the opportunity to ask that question might not have changed my vote but it might have I mean I might actually vote no which wouldn't surprise any of my house members that I might vote no on something but you know I just don't really understand what just happened here I think I'm gonna have a few other
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
39:50
members who feel the same way okay Oh representative Beatty I would
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
40:15
like to hear what the representatives question was now okay go ahead well it wasn't anything earth-shattering thank you madam chair but I just was wanting some
insight on what adult programs and funding we already currently have and are doing as that that
study occurred so that was and and representative ray had answered a little bit of that when he talked about the the money that i think he has said 20 million that was already out there but i was curious a little bit more hard numbers of what the state was currently doing as we study whether we want
Senator Jane English
Unverified
40:44
to do more or shift money somewhere else i i think probably your your point is well taken And I think that it would be really important for us to take a look at what we're doing with adult education. And we have a couple of other programs that are in that same arena that are not part of state government but are private sector type things.
So I think your point is, and as part of this whole study, we need to know exactly what we're doing and how successful we are with the GED program, adult education, that we've got right now. You have a good point, but it's probably not something that we can answer today because we don't have anybody here that can come up with all those answers. Does that make sense?
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
41:31
Thank you. I'll just make one additional point in the hopes of endeavoring to not lose the forest
for the trees. The proposal itself was that the ALC committee refer back to us a report that includes without limitations a study of just without being specific to the excel center or goodwill ged tests high school diplomas in-person adult education charter schools and the allocation of fundings for those so the isp does look at it from a larger perspective i also think i agree that we kind of took a motion i want to say in order out of order nevertheless the motion was taken it passed i would say
if anyone hasn't had the opportunity to yet i would encourage you to make contact with brian and his team following this to either get a tour in Northwest Arkansas, the Excel Center, or here in Little Rock. This is a great discussion. The work that they do is very worthy. The decision-making or the value that we place on funding X, Y, and Z, we'll leave that for a different day as the study comes back. It brings truth to reality when you go and tour it. So I would encourage everybody here to reach out to Brian and his team. I'm sure he'll take all of us one by one
or in a big field trip or something to see it in
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
42:56
real life. Thank you. Representative Brown. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is not to quibble, but it was a little confusing. If our population is 3 million, 300,000 would represent more than 10% of our adults.
You know, because 300,000 would be 10% of the entire population. So 300,000 represents more than 10% of the adults. Then the other thing I wanted to point out, a request, a concern, there was a statement that 49% decrease in criminal charges. I was curious, is that 49% of the people who already had criminal charges or just a general decrease over the population?
And if I'm responding to the question I was allowed to ask to just identify my questions, that's all I'm doing. I'm not waiting for answers. And I was
wondering if Excel centers are only available through Goodwill. And that ought to do it. Thank you. If y'all could just address that later. Thank you. Could I real quick?
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
44:10
So you're stating that into the record so that staff could follow up with the Goodwill Industries of Arkansas?
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
44:16
Yes, please. Wonderful. Thank you. Senator Flowers. Thank you,
Madam Chair. You know, as I read the proposal that we have now adopted for interim study, It appears that the further work on this study is going to go through the House Committee on Education. And so I don't think it's appropriate that we have all these questions at this meeting when we've got adequacy.
Now, we've almost spent a whole hour on an interim study proposal that we had not even adopted. So I would ask that we end the discussion on the interim study proposal and leave it for scheduling with the House Committee on Education. Go ahead. Is there, what is
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
45:13
your point of order? Just move on? Oh, okay. Understood. I mean, but I think it's okay to have discussion.
It's on our agenda today. People came from all over the state. So I understand your point. It's not meritless, though. I think we should have discussion if it's on an agenda. It's been set out for over a week. I understand you made your point. We made the motion that it's proposed, but... If you want to make a motion to end debate, I think you should have done that. But you made a motion to adopt the proposal. We're still just having some discussion. They're speaking into the record so that staff can follow up with Goodwill Industries of Arkansas. I don't think that's totally meritless in the discussion.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
45:54
It was on the agenda for the purpose of adopting the ISP. Not all this discussion, and then, when you talk about discussion, the ISP itself says the House Committee on Education should deal with
Speaker 106
46:14
this ISP, not the Joint Committee. So my point is, why are we here
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
46:19
spending time, almost an hour now, We also have an update from the Department of Ed on the agenda and adequacy study overview.
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
46:32
Why would we be wasting all this time?
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
46:39
Waste is your word. Is there a time you want us to leave by? No, but like I said, it was there for the purpose of adopting. And the bill itself, the proposal itself, says the House Committee on Education is supposed to deal with the IS. So if there are discussions on ISP that are presented to the joint committee, but only
Speaker 110
47:06
will be developed by the House, one committee on this occasion, why would
Speaker 1
47:26
agenda like that? thank you okay moving right along
Senator Jane English
Unverified
47:37
so our next next presentation is going to be by
Adrian Beck and Katie Walden. We're going
to talk about the adequacy funding overview. Where are they?
Senator Jane English
Unverified
48:50
and if you'll identify Identify yourself. She'll be recognized.
Speaker 120
48:59
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Good afternoon, members. Katie Walden, BLR Fiscal Division. Adrienne
Speaker 122
49:06
Beck, also with the Bureau. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 125
49:54
Just one second, I think the computer is not quite connected right, so just one moment.
Speaker 129
50:54
They're ready. Okay, go ahead. Go ahead. Maybe. Good afternoon. I'm Adrienne Beck with the Bureau, and we're going to be going over the funding overview as part of
Speaker 131
51:20
the adequacy study. So, we're going to start with a look at adequacy statute requirements on this topic.
Speaker 129
51:25
So, the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act of 2004 requires the education committees to review and monitor the amount of funding provided by the state based on need to provide an adequate educational system, not based on available funding. It also requires the committees to make funding recommendations each biennial. And this is all to be done using evidence-based research to recalibrate as needed.
Speaker 131
51:59
So in today's presentation, we're going to start with some national research on K-12 education funding models before
Speaker 129
52:07
we dig into Arkansas-specific information. And as we dig into Arkansas' K-12 public education funding model, we'll start with revenues, including a discussion of what these are, how they're collected, and how they're distributed at the state level. And then we'll talk about how these revenues are then distributed to the districts and charters in the form of foundation, categorical, supplemental, and additional funding.
Speaker 131
52:34
With that, we'll start with some national information. First, we have some information from the
Speaker 129
52:42
National Conference of State Legislatures, known as NCSL. So they define a state finance education system as one representing a comprehensive framework that governs how educational resources
Speaker 131
52:53
are raised, allocated, and managed across multiple levels of government. Additionally,
Speaker 129
52:59
in 2023, according to the most recently available data from NCSS,
the National Center for Educational Statistics. State funds make up the largest portion of K-12 public education revenues at 45% across all states, with local sources making up 42%, and the remaining 13% coming from federal sources. So NCSL also updated their principles for a sound education finance system in 2025, so we're going to go over these briefly.
So we have the LODE STAR, and they refer to this as meaning a sound finance education system begins with and supports the overarching vision and mission of the entire educational system. Equity, which means the system adjusts for student needs, school district characteristics, and local economic capacity to ensure resources are proportional to need. Then we have adequacy, which means that a sound education finance system provides sufficient resources across the system to achieve reasonable and manageable goals of the statewide education system.
Efficiency, which means that the system aligns resource allocations at every level to the goals of the statewide education system while enabling flexible decisions closest to students where the impact is greatest. Accountability, which means that the system promotes accountability through transparency and includes the ability to link financial decisions to the goals of the statewide educational system. And then finally, stability, meaning that a sound education finance system should deliver stable funds
for schools and school systems by relying on a mix of revenue sources that behave predictably over time. So another set of principles was released by the Education Commission of the States, or ECS, in 2025. And we're going to go over those briefly as well, and you'll see an overlap here with some of NCSL's principles. But the first one is transparency. So this means that the state aid is allocated using a formula that is simple, logical, clearly articulated, and informed by students, families, teachers, and school leaders.
Speaker 131
55:26
The next one is student-centered. This means that
Speaker 129
55:31
funding is allocated based on learning needs of students with a focus on improving outcomes. Third one is also adequate, as mentioned in NCSL. So they refer to adequate as providing sufficient resources to provide a high-quality education for all students and to meet state achievement goals for student learning. Fair is the next one, and this means that resources are prioritized to schools where students have the most complex learning needs and districts where local resources are most limited.
And then our last one is sustainable, meaning schools have a dependable level of state resources that allows district leaders to plan multiple years in advance and invest in services with confidence going forward. So a quick look at some other funding models in other states. So ECS, Education Commission of the States, did a 50-state comparison in 2025 of state K-12 funding models and identified four models used.
So this includes a student-based model, meaning districts receive a base amount per student with
Speaker 131
56:43
additional money or weights to address other needs. Then we have a resource-based model, meaning districts receive sufficient funding to pay for minimum required services, like staffing or programs. And then we have a
Speaker 129
57:02
hybrid system, which is a combination of these two unique to the state.
And then a fourth model identified as other, essentially any kind of other system not identified here, and there were only a handful of states across the country. and that had this model. And specifically for a regional perspective, we're going to identify, use the SREB states, the Southern Regional Education Board states, and identify their funding models as defined by ECS. So there were several states, most of those SREB states
were identified as having a student-based model, which includes Arkansas. Then five other states had a resource-based system and then one other state had the hybrid model and none of the SREB states had
Speaker 137
57:51
the other model defined by ECS. So that's going to bring
Speaker 129
57:59
us into where we're going to spend most of our time today which is discussing Arkansas's education funding model.
So as I mentioned earlier we're going to begin with revenues received to fund public k-12 education in arkansas in 2025 k-12 public education state and local revenues total 6.6 billion dollars and i will first explain what sources of funds are included in that 6.6 billion then katie is going to go over how these revenues are collected and distributed at the state level and then we'll conclude with a review of how these revenues are then distributed at the
Speaker 131
58:40
district level so we'll start with our revenue sources you'll see here
Speaker 129
58:50
state and local revenues over the past five school years in 2025 3.1 billion of that total 6.6 billion or 47 percent came from state sources with local funds making up 3 billion or 45 percent and that remaining 500 million comes from other funds that we'll talk over in future slides but you'll see this pattern
or this makeup from state and local funds has changed a little bit over the past few years so in the 21 school year state funds made up 53 percent of total revenues with local funds making up 44 percent so you'll see that local funds are now making up more of total revenues and state funds are making up less and as a note you'll notice that federal funds are not included here since they're not a part of adequacy but I will provide you some details about federal funding later in the presentation for additional context and with that I will pass it over to Katie
Speaker 120
59:48
thank you members so building off of that bar chart that you all just saw
Speaker 146
59:56
I'm going to kind of go over the different funding types that go into creating an equitable education for districts. The first piece that I want to identify are the other funds. You'll see that makes up 8% of the funds that go to districts. These are classified as other by Department of Education in the annual statistical report.
and these are district specific sources of funding and they include their outside of tax revenues so that includes debt taken on by the districts it includes proceeds from the sales of bonds and fixed assets any balances that they have as well as indirect cost reimbursements so I just want to name that those are district decisions they are district specific sources of funds but we do record and report them annually so moving on to our state funding
i'm going to spend the most of my time talking about this section you'll see that we have general revenue and we also have dedicated general or dedicated tax revenue resources for our
Speaker 120
1:01:05
education here first beginning with general revenue each year the governor allocates and
Speaker 146
1:01:09
you all fund a general revenue amount for the public school fund for the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education. DESI, which I'll also interchangeably refer to it, they received the largest share of
Speaker 120
1:01:23
general revenues of any agency each year. In FY 2025, they received $2.4 billion for K-12 education for this allocation. And this total award each year is calculated considering several factors. First, historically,
Speaker 146
1:01:42
it is including recommendations by the Educational Adequacy Study. It also includes calculated projections in local property revenue growth to accurately fund state foundation funding for traditional public schools as well as charter schools.
Speaker 120
1:01:59
They also include considerations for projected movement in public schools, for example, if they are anticipating or have seen declining enrollment or growth in districts. Also, increased eligibility or reduced eligibility for certain
Speaker 146
1:02:11
categorical expenditures. All of this is taken into consideration when ADE is putting together the budget and when the governor presents her balanced budget to you all. And also, any other needs that are identified by the Department of Education or any member bills that are passed during legislative session, anything that's appropriated by law that
needs to be funded, any new program that is created, it is all accounted for when they consider this general revenue budget amount. so ADE tabulates their budget request and they present it to you all during budget hearings accommodating all of these considerations and then we as staff are directed to draft the bill depending on what joint budget committee indicates that we do and then that bill is introduced and it is integrated during the regular session and ultimately changed or not changed and then passed
into law for the next fiscal year. As I stated before, the DESE Public School Fund received $2.4 billion in general revenue funding by this allocation, and it was enacted in Act 10-14 of 2025. So that's the general revenue. Now I'm going to dig down into dedicated revenue streams also provided for education each year. And before I leave this behind, I want to mention there is one revenue that is not on this slide.
It is about $2 million in transit taxes, and you'll see it mentioned in the budget manual if you look. This was passed in 2006, but it's so small that it didn't get a face on the slide. But in 2006, there was an increase in rental vehicle taxes that was passed, and it goes straight into the public school fund to help fund salaries for teachers. So that is also included in this dedicated stream. But the two major funds that I want to mention today are the Educational Excellence Trust Fund and the Educational Adequacy Fund.
First, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund is funded with a, quote, off-the-top deduction from gross general revenues. And this amount is distributed, or the amount distributed is 14% of prior year sales and use tax collections. So we know at the beginning of the year that 14% of the tax collections is going to go to Department of Ed and institutions of higher education as directed in law to help fund the Educational Excellence Trust Fund.
It was created in 1991 to provide additional funding for teacher salaries and to support other programs of educational opportunity. In 2025, $320 million was transferred from the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, and this represents 60% growth in the annual distribution when compared to the distribution that happened in 2015. So this fund continues to grow consistently as our tax revenues grow, as the economy grows.
and these funds are used by DESE to provide a portion of the State Foundation funding aid distributed to public school districts, and it is supposed to be used for teacher salaries.
Speaker 146
1:05:31
the Educational Adequacy Fund. This was created to fund adequacy after the Lakeview decision, and it derives its funding from a seven-eighths cent sales tax increase, the expansion of sales taxes to some services, vending machine decal fees, and an increased minimum corporate franchise tax.
well as some a portion of died diesel tax revenue I also want to mention that the educational adequacy fund revenues are a little bit different because they are held at the Department of Finance and administration and each month revenue from these taxes come in and they're held and those funds continue to collect. And the Department of Education draws those funds down upon request at DF&A. So each
year, at the beginning of the year, they certify their total need that they think they will need to fund adequacy. And they write a letter to the Department of Finance Administration saying, we need this much. And then that money will flow as the revenues become available. It's also available if the Department of Education has an emergency or needs to come back to that fund at any time if there is a balance they can write another letter asking for more money to be drawn down so it's kind of a safety net to continue to fund adequacy as needed and the purpose of this fund i want to mention in code it just states that is to fulfill the
financial obligation of the state to provide an adequate educational system as authorized by law so it's for adequacy okay so those are all the state funds that we dedicate annually to education i just want to touch quickly on the local sources of funding as well local revenues are the funds that build the the building block for foundation so these are the property taxes and tax relief tax accruals delinquent taxes excess commissions and all these funds are collected by the counties
and then they are transmitted to the state treasurer counted certified and then returned to the counties to be distributed for the district so this is the local portion of the foundation funds when we're talking about the local funding and you can see they come from a variety of sources it's the tax revenue and there's also miscellaneous funds like rental income donations sales vending machine revenues it's the catch-all those are all the miscellaneous funds so those are the local funds next i'm going to talk about the collection and distribution at the state level of funding
Speaker 120
1:08:13
for the public school fund the department of education operations appropriation and the facilities partnership program for the
Speaker 146
1:08:24
public school fund you'll see this is the primary account used to distribute state funds to traditional public schools and open enrollment public charter schools as i mentioned before they have their set general revenue allocation that is proposed by the governor and ultimately decided upon by you all there's also the off the top transfer from the
educational excellence trust fund and also transfers from the educational adequacy fund as requested by the department of education all three of those allocations go into the public school fund on top of any balances that are already there to create the full public school fund allocation for the year the department of education can then use their appropriations to pay the districts and charters for their foundation amounts for categorical spending for all the supplemental items and any other items that are appropriated or under their watch
that are appropriated in the public school fund so that's how the money kind of goes in and comes back out for the public school fund next we'll look at the department of education oh I'm sorry so here is the summary for the last five years that you'll see and as I mentioned for 2025 you'll see 2.44 billion in general revenue the educational excellence in blue at 321 million and the educational adequacy fund transfer and for the last three years the department of ed has requested 594 million to be transferred at the beginning of each year so you can kind of see the trends there
okay next we'll talk about the department of education operations the department of education also receives general revenue educational excellence trust funding educational adequacy funding to provide for the implementation of statewide programs provided in law. This is their staff, their operations, their accountability programs for the districts. Similar to the public school fund, ADE receives annual funding from general revenue,
EETF, and the educational adequacy fund. All three of those allocations go into the DESI fund account, and then that money is spent on staff programming and initiatives of the department. And here is the funding bar chart for DESE, $18.3 million in general revenue, $1.6 million in educational excellence trust funds, and their educational adequacy fund transfer has been flat for the last many years. It's been $4.3 million.
The last section I want to mention just briefly are the educational facilities partnership funds.
Speaker 120
1:11:10
the educational facilities partnership fund account is the account used for the distribution of aid for programs providing academic
Speaker 146
1:11:20
school facility and transportation assistance to public school districts this account consists of general revenues and monies transferred from a restricted reserve fund set aside they also receive bonded debt assistance savings from
the public school fund each year so that is considered a transfer it's not considered new money um and so we have the same kind of flow chart you'll see they have their designated state revenue which many years ago it was an allocation from general revenue but now there is a restricted reserve fund set aside that the education department has access to to draw down on and then also the bonded debt assistance savings those monies are combined and put into the partnership fund account and that money sits there to be used as needed for eligible projects
with school districts for the facilities partnership program looking at the chart you'll see we from 2021 to 2023 these were all general revenue allocations new money provided to the facilities partnership program then in 2024 you all set aside 500 million dollars in a restricted reserve fund set aside for the facilities partnership program to use each year to annual to fund their projects each year i want to mention it you'll see a big spike in 2024
that's because ade actually funded two years of projects there was one transfer in july of 2023 for 83 million dollars and that was to cover the fy24 projects then there was another transfer in April of 2024 and that was kind of anticipating the 2025 project so they covered two years of funding in one year in FY24 so you'll see in FY25 there were zero transfers and then I'll mention also in FY26 we have transferred 60 million for the partnership program and that leaves the balance
of that restricted reserve fund set aside at 292 million so we still have 292 million left to live off of. So that's my summary of the local state and other funding as well as the collection and distribution of funding to districts and for ADE and the partnership
Speaker 131
1:13:43
take back over and we're going to get
Speaker 129
1:13:46
into Arkansas's education funding model and focus on how those revenues are distributed to the districts and charters. So they receive these
funds in four primary ways we have foundation categorical supplemental and additional funds and as a reminder we're looking strictly at state and local funds we're not going to this will not include a federal um so foundation funds make up 56 percent of total funds received by districts and charters in the 25 school year and additional funds made up 35 percent categorical made up five and then the remaining four percent came from supplemental. And in response to a question that
came up in our last adequacy meeting, foundation funding is unrestricted, categoricals are restricted, supplementals are mostly unrestricted, and then additional are mixed, and we'll get into more of those today and then tomorrow's presentation about spending. So we're going to dig into each of these groups starting with foundation funds, which is where I'm going to spend the most of this time at so foundation funds are made up of four primary components first we have local funds this refers to the uniform rate of tax or urt and this is the first 25 mils of millage money that's
received from local property taxes and then our second and third sources are both from the state but they are distinct from each other so we have the 98 adjustment this is provided to ensure that 98 percent of a local district's property taxes are met if collections fall short then we have the state foundation aid and this is the state's portion to offset foundation funds that are not covered by the urt and then finally we have miscellaneous funds and these are district
specific and include the following so these are primarily like some federal funds federal forest reserves grazing rights mineral rights and you can see how that list continues there and yeah yeah like i said these are a assortment of primarily federal funds so there is a mix there so i want to dig into um the proportion of how those funds kind of settle out so in 2025 3.7 billion dollars in was distributed in foundation funds to districts and charters
Over half of those funds came through state foundation aid, with 43% coming from local URT funds, with a 98% adjustment and then miscellaneous funds, each making up 1% respectively. Though it is important to note it is a difference in the distribution between districts and charters. So with districts, that split is primarily happening with traditional districts. And then with charters, because they don't have a traditional tax base like traditional districts do, their foundation funds are 100% state funded.
And this is showing you how that has played out for the last few school years. So you'll see the amount of state funds used in foundation funding has slightly decreased from almost 60% in the 22 school year to almost 55% in the 25 school year with a corresponding increase in use of local funds. And so we're going to dig into that trend a little bit more here in the next few slides. So in Arkansas, we have what I refer to often as URT districts or high URT districts.
And these are districts that are not receiving state foundation aid in any particular individual school year because their local revenues are covering all of their foundation funding needs. So in 2025, we had eight of these districts shown here. And for context, with some additional data, the 2025 per student foundation funding amount was $7,771. and we'll discuss how that amount is calculated a little bit later in this presentation.
But for now, you can see the total per student amount raised through each district's property taxes and then how that compares to the foundation funding amount. So you'll see that the amount above what they needed in foundation funds ranged from $400 per student up to $8,000 per student, which is nearly which is more than double what the foundation funding amount was and this came to 19 million dollars in 2025. So to help illustrate this phenomenon the following table
includes details on two districts that have regularly been you are a URT district in past years so that's Armorell and Fountain Lake and then two districts that became one for the first time in the 25 school year and that's Marvola Lane and Pulaski County Special School District. So you'll see a range of funding amounts generated in local taxes as well as in miscellaneous funds and those are used to determine the amount of state aid so they're combined with local funds to determine how much state foundation funding aid is needed. So you'll see for Armarell for example
received more than two million dollars in Pulaski or miscellaneous funds in Pulaski County received almost 93 million dollars in their local tax collection and you'll also see a range of average daily membership or ADMs and this is what's used to determine foundation funding but this is so you'll see a range of district sizes that this is impacting or this is occurring at and I'll dig into a couple of these new ones using to the Marvel Elaine and Pulaski County School District
since they are new to becoming to this phenomenon so we're going to dig into those two districts and some of their data for the past few years so starting with Marbella Lane so you'll see their local tax revenue increased by 15 percentage points between 22 and 25 and though their miscellaneous funds decreased by seven percentage points during that time but an overall increase of local and miscellaneous funds and then you'll notice their ADM their prior year three-quarter
ADM this is a specific enrollment count that's used to determine foundation funding you'll see that has been decreasing during that same time so in short as our local revenues are increasing their ADM is decreasing there is more local revenue available per student and eventually surpassed the foundation funding amount in the 25 school year and then the next district that we'll go over this is the Pulaski County Special School District so a slightly different scenario but you'll see an overall increase in local and miscellaneous funds 27% overall though there was
a larger increase in miscellaneous funds during that time so you'll see that their ADM remained relatively steady in comparison to Marvola Lane but you'll see in short the same phenomenon is happening where their local revenues increased and eventually generated more per student than their foundation funding amount needed. And for historical component on the ADM overall for the state, we're going to look at how that's
changed in the past few school years. So as a reminder, this is foundation funding is distributed to traditional districts and charters based on prior year ADM and though this is a little bit different for open enrollment charter schools with their in their first year adding grade levels expanding enrollment caps they have they'll use a current year count but otherwise it's all prior year but in 2025 foundation funding was provided based on 469,791 students so that drops
statewide by less than a percentage point over the past couple of school years though that same ADM increased particularly in charter schools by 16 percentage points so it is increasing decreasing statewide but increasing amongst open enrollment public charters and as a note I
Speaker 131
1:22:06
think this came up in our last adequacy meeting the ADM has been in use
Speaker 129
1:22:12
since the 2003 so the ADA hasn't been used at least in the last 20 years for the
average daily attendance I should say so we're going to go over the matrix this is the mechanism that's used to determine the amount of foundation funding and again this is unrestricted and you'll hear this if you haven't already but that this is a funding model and not a spending model so that's where this comes into play. But the matrix calculates a per student funding rate based on the cost of personnel and other resources for operating a K-12 prototypical school of 500 students.
So that 500 student model evolved from the prevailing research back in 2003 that showed that schools, not districts, with 500 students operated most efficiently and produced the best results in terms of academic achievement. Arkansas legislators took an education of consultants, Auden and Picus, who converted, who used a per school funding approach, and the state converted that to a per pupil funding approach using 500 students as the basis. Therefore, it takes 500
students to fully fund each resource listed in the matrix. And of the 259 districts and charters, 21% had an average daily membership of below 500 with open enrollment public charter schools a 48% of those having an ADM below 500 in the 25 school year. So of those 500 students the matrix assumes an enrollment of 8% students for kindergarten
23% in 1st through 3rd grades and 69% of those in 4th through 12th grades and you'll see those ratios here with the number of classroom teachers funded based on the class size and student to teacher ratios. So non-core teachers also referred to as specialist teachers or PM as you see in the matrix. These are funded based on 20% of the total core teachers. So in all 24.94 core and non-core classroom full-time equivalent or FTE teachers are included in the matrix for every 500 students
Speaker 131
1:24:32
in addition to the teachers and student support personnel the matrix also calculates
Speaker 129
1:24:39
funding for one principal and one secretary for every 500 students so the staffing ratios that are included in the matrix are not necessarily the same ones required in the rules governing the standards for accreditation or rules governing class size and teaching load and these are so in short these are the school staff positions that are identified as necessary for an adequate education so the
matrix calculates funding needed for the total reading for the number of FTE staff listed here for every 500 students using salary and benefit amounts that we'll go over in the next slide so the matrix includes the base salary insurance and benefit amounts for teaching positions principals and secretaries as adopted by the general assembly and as a note the teacher salary and benefit amount applies to all school level staffing positions we've covered in the last slide so all of these are converted to a per student amount in the following way so you'll
take the total FTEs, the ones we noted in the last slide, and multiply that by the respective salary and benefits amount, and then we'll divide that by 500 students, which is the basis of the matrix. So, for example, you would take the total 33.69 classroom teachers and people support staff and multiply that by the $76,022 benefit and salaries amount, divide that by 500, and you at the 5122 amount and all of that to explain is these are going to get combined to make help make
up that total 7771 dollar per student amount so the next part of the matrix covers school and district level resources including technology instructional materials operations and maintenance and student transportation along with a few others and these are all funded using a flat per student amount that's adopted by the general assembly and the per student amounts provide for school level personnel school level resources as well as district level resources and these are
all combined to get a total per student amount and along with the staffing school level staffing per student amounts to get that total seven thousand seven hundred and seventy one dollars for the 25 school year. Additionally, in the 27 school year upcoming, the health insurance contribution rate, noted here as the all other personnel health insurance line, will no longer be calculated as the overall per student per pupil foundation funding rate.
So this shows how that per student foundation funding amount has changed in the last 10 years overall with a few exceptions individual line amounts haven't changed that much over time but there has been a steady increase in the total per student amount that's been distributed in the last several years so our next group of funds that districts and charters received is in form of our categorical funding so we have four of these as shown here and these are funds that have been
created to address additional educational needs. They are restricted in use to meet the intent of each respective fund. However, they can be transferred within each other to meet needs at the district level. So ALE, which is our Alternative Learning Environment Categorical Fund, this is designed to eliminate traditional barriers to learning for students. Then we have English Learner or EL funds, and these are used to overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by students in instructional programs enhanced student achievement or ESA
formerly known as a national school lunch program this is used to improve instruction and increase academic achievement of students who qualify for the national free and reduced-price lunch program and then finally professional development which is designed to or has the intent of improving teaching and learning to facilitate individual school-wide and system-wide improvements to ensure that students participate or demonstrate proficiency on state academic standards. So these are the per student funded amounts for the
25th school year and the corresponding total funded amounts for that same school year. So for ALE, the Alternative Learning Environment Fund, these students generate $5,086 per student, coming to approximately $28 million for the 25 school year. English learner students generate $366 per student, or $16 million in 25. ESA students generate three different amounts, depending on the concentration of free or reduced-price lunch
students at the district and then finally for pd or professional development all students generate 41 per student um though while these other three funds are distributed to a specific student population professional development funds are distributed to the entire student population so all students would generate a professional development funded amount for each school respective district though you'll see an asterisk and this is because these funds are distributed
out in two other ways that the categorical other categorical funds do not so we're going to get into this a little bit more but in short districts receive 37.50 and the other portions of that 41 go to two other mechanism or entities here so in 2025 professional development funds were first directed towards professional learning grants in the amount of 16.5 million dollars so this is making up 45 percent of total professional development categorical funds and we'll get
into more of the details about how this program operates tomorrow's presentation but the next group after the professional learning grants funds is for arkansas ideas within aetn arkansas educational television network and this is in the amount of 2.7 million dollars or seven percent of all professional development categorical funds and then the remaining 17.7 million dollars goes to districts and charters through that 37 and dollars and 50 cent per student amount and this
Speaker 137
1:31:21
makes up uh 45 percent of 48 percent of all professional development categorical funds so that takes us to
Speaker 129
1:31:31
our supplemental fund category and there were eight of these and these are all designed where they were all created with the intention of meeting additional specific needs that districts may have not already met by the matrix or categoricals so the first one is enhanced transportation which is provided to help districts and charters cover transportation costs
that are above what is covered in foundation funding then we have our esa or enhanced student achievement matching grants these support schools and charters that use specific research-based practices to help students who qualify for free or reduced price lunches then we have our special education high-cost occurrences, which is a reimbursement funding mechanism for districts and charters for eligible costs that are unduly expensive, extraordinary, or beyond the normal
and routine special education and related services. And then isolated funds. These are provided to districts with low enrollment or geographic challenges. Then we also have teacher salary equalization funds, which are provided to support districts and charters with teacher salaries below the teacher average teacher salary, and then
declining enrollment, which is, of course, provided to districts with declining enrollment. Learned teacher salary funds are provided to districts to meet requirements set in Act 237 of 2023 to be made that minimum base salary of $50,000 and then finally student growth funding which is provided to districts and charters experiencing growth and then then these are the total funding amounts for each of these funds for the 25 school year and then finally additional
funds for the 25 school year so that came to 3.1 billion dollars for 2025 and you'll see those across a few different
Speaker 131
1:33:34
categories of funds there. But that's our final piece of
Speaker 128
1:33:39
the funding model for Arkansas. We're happy to take any questions you may have.
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:33:57
Thank you very much. We have
Speaker 165
1:34:04
some questions here. representative gonzalez thank you
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:34:09
madam chair um on the matrix on slide 37 this is in regard to student support staff i wanted to can you elaborate um what that might include that's a good question so um
Speaker 131
1:34:29
there's not for any of these lines because they're not in
statute there's no clear definition for what that is it can include um an assortment of positions um i don't have that
Speaker 137
1:34:42
right off the top of my head but i can get those to
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:34:48
you but there is no clear definition for each of those okay the reason okay so that's that's one and it's kind of related to let me see the salaries for okay now going to slide 42 the ESSA or enhanced
student achievement to improve instruction and increase academic achievement so what would that include so and
Speaker 131
1:35:18
in short there's a variety of uses that are allowed for the
Speaker 129
1:35:25
ESA program in our report tomorrow we're going to cover the spending in that report so we're going to get into details about all the different
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
1:35:35
expenditures included there okay and then and then in the categorical I know that you have the ALE alternative
learning environment and then the English learner that's slide 43 English learner students and I guess my questions they're all kind of related to these different categories for for example without a clear definition of students support staff in the matrix instructional assistants or pair professionals might that be included in that and and if not then to what about
ESSA funds with that for that group of individual staff support staff pair professionals instructional assistants and then I know that it is spelled out in the categorical funds for English learner under categorical and that would be English learners so I guess I'm just wondering because if because there is such a need right now for positions in the area of instructional assistance and
support academic support and I just wondered I'm new at this but I'm just wondering how that how that works a follow-up is I know that we have students who are in special ed they're English learners and they they're also in the ALE and you know when you have you know kind of they're they're in all of these different categories you know how how are they how are we providing
that access to the curriculum for example within these different categories so I'm gonna go
Speaker 131
1:37:30
back to the first question make sure I got it right was about the instructional aides and prepare professionals so in short one we will be getting into that more I'm like a broker record here but some of that will be covered in our spending report tomorrow but I do want to know and that instructional aides is one that has been a common it is often a use of these
categorical funds though we also see them come up
Speaker 129
1:37:58
in other ways that we'll cover tomorrow as well so they but there is quite a bit
Speaker 73
1:38:11
of expenditures that do go towards instructional aid representative
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:38:18
Emmett thank you madam chair I have a question about the category character sorry category the funding that we're talking about right now one question is special
education high-cost occurrences can you give me some examples of what is unduly expensive or extraordinary is that a question for the district I mean for the department i can explain that a little bit and again i'll be a broken
Speaker 131
1:38:46
record um that will cover that more in some of the spending in that tomorrow but i will say that the way those funds work is i don't have these specific examples of what those actual expenditures look like but i can
Speaker 129
1:39:02
tell you that the first fifteen thousand dollars per student will be covered by the district so anything above $15,000 per student. So
Speaker 131
1:39:09
these are typically, I think, I could have Desi explain a little bit further if needed. But these are typically, I think, like high nursing needs that might be an
Speaker 137
1:39:22
example of that. I don't have the specific types of expenditures, but it's typically above $15,000 that would generate those kind of claims. Okay, I
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:39:31
have a second question, if I may.
With the ALE population, is it $5,086 per student on top of the foundation funding? That's correct. Okay. So when does that funding start, like, once they get placed? Is it, like, 30 days after they are in this setting? I don't have it with me, but there is a threshold of days that
Speaker 131
1:40:02
generate funding. But we'll cover that a little bit more tomorrow as well for that.
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:40:09
Okay. Thank you. Representative Painter. Thank you, Madam
Speaker 182
1:40:16
Chair. Just two quick questions. Slide 49. It says
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:40:18
other estate local funds include $4.5 million for the Excel Center. Remind me of the Excel Center again. Yes. So they are the adult carter system. That's
Speaker 131
1:40:31
why we typically exclude them because they are not funded the same way as the K-12 charter
Speaker 129
1:40:36
schools. And for some of the expenditures, we just weren't able to pull them out as we normally do.
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified
1:40:41
So that's why I want to make a note that they are included in that fund. So that's included in that $4.5 million, just want to make sure I do my math right, is included in the $1.5
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:40:57
billion? Correct. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Representative Duke. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all for your presentation. I always enjoy it very much, but I could talk education for a few hours. So my question has to do with teacher salary equalization dollars, and I don't know if that's a question for today or if you're going to cover this tomorrow,
but I'm going to go ahead and lay it out there so that wherever you need to answer it, it's fine with me. So my question is, how many districts – let me get my glasses back on so I can read my handwriting. How many districts still fall in that area of need? I think maybe it was 24 or so at one point. My number may be off on that. And then since the institution of the raising of the $50,000, because I know it was those teachers in that moment of time, how has that changed? How many districts do we have that now need that additional?
Because they've increased staff, and so the district's having to make up that $50,000 because it's not coming from that other bucket of money, is my understanding is correct. So has that increased over since we initially, since learns initially passed? and um also has it dropped i mean have there been districts who have dropped out because their attendance has dropped and so they haven't needed they've had to maybe do reduction in forces or something like that and so they are maybe not in need so what is what does that look like
now because there's so many moving parts in this space absolutely so i know for sure we're going to cover
Speaker 131
1:42:19
the number of districts that receive that in the tomorrow's presentation and i know we can get you the information about the change if it's not already
Speaker 137
1:42:25
included in that presentation tomorrow we'll absolutely get you the historical but I don't have that with me offhand okay yeah and and as far as
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:42:33
just the movement and everything that's happened to and all those different districts will you have a list of the districts as well I don't know if we have it in the presentation but I know we have that that we could absolutely give you I think that would be just great just because it's I mean I would think most members know if they have districts that that receive those funds or are maybe in need of those funds now who didn't receive them in the past and so I think
that would be helpful. So, thank
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:43:00
you very much. Appreciate it. Representative
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:43:09
Emmett. Would you come on? Thank you, Madam Chair. I have one more quick question about the alternative learning environment. Why is there an additional funding attached to the foundational funding?
Speaker 132
1:43:24
Make sure I understand the question. Why is there funding for students in alternative learning?
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:43:29
Why is there an extra pot of
Speaker 131
1:43:32
money for that? I don't know the history quite off the top
Speaker 129
1:43:36
of my head, but essentially there are students that require additional services. They may not be performing as well in the traditional classroom. And so schools are required to or have been required to in the past to have alternative learning
Speaker 131
1:43:48
environment programs to help students in those particular situations. So that's why that amount was generated.
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:43:54
at the time and i don't know if you can answer this is there a breakdown of some
Speaker 131
1:44:00
of those services we could get that to you i
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
1:44:03
think we should be able to and how many of these um aoles are in the state of
Speaker 131
1:44:08
arkansas if i remember correctly all districts are required to have them i'm not um 100 sure how big they might vary district to district but i know they're all required to or at least in the past they have been required to provide those services okay thank you Okay,
Senator Jane English
Unverified
1:44:22
that looks like all the questions we have here.
Just a little brief update here on the agenda. It says that the department will give us an update. They don't really have anything to give us an update on, but last meeting we had a number of questions in the group, and nobody really had the answers to it, so the department has agreed to come and be here in case we have
questions, and only they know the answers too so that there is no update but they have been very kind to come
and sit so that when we have questions then there is somebody who actually has the answers
so seeing no further questions thank you very much
ladies we will look forward to seeing you tomorrow and if there's no further business the meeting is adjourned Thank you.
Agenda
A. Call to Order
B. Consideration of a Motion to Approve the February 2, 2026, and the February 3, 2026, Meeting Minutes [Exhibits B1-B2]
C. Consideration for Adoption of Interim Study Proposal (ISP) [Exhibit C]
D. Update from the Arkansas Department of Education
E. 2026 Adequacy Study: Funding Overview [Exhibits E1-E2]
F. Other Business
G. Adjournment
Documents
Speakers
Senator Jane English
Unverified
Speaker 6
Speaker 9
Speaker 14
Speaker 18
Speaker 19
Speaker 23
Speaker 24
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Speaker 20
Speaker 32
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
Speaker 30
Representative David Ray
Unverified
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
Speaker 67
Senator Fredrick J. Love
Unverified
Speaker 70
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
Representative Howard M. Beaty, Jr.
Unverified
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
Speaker 106
Speaker 110
Speaker 112
Speaker 1
Speaker 117
Speaker 114
Speaker 120
Speaker 122
Speaker 125
Speaker 129
Speaker 131
Speaker 137
Speaker 146
Speaker 152
Speaker 148
Speaker 128
Speaker 165
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
Speaker 73
Representative Denise Jones Ennett
Unverified
Speaker 132
Speaker 182
Representative Stetson Painter
Unverified