PART 2. TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY
CHAPTER 61. SCHOOL DISTRICTS
SUBCHAPTER BB. COMMISSIONER'S RULES ON REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The Texas Education Agency adopts new §61.1026, concerning statutorily required reporting through the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS). The new section is adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the February 14, 2020 issue of the Texas Register (45 TexReg 986) and will not be republished. The adopted new rule implements legislation that requires school districts to report information on the availability of school counselors and expanded learning opportunities through the Texas Student Data System (TSDS) PEIMS.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: Senate Bill (SB) 490, 85th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2017, and SB 1404, 85th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2017, added two versions of Texas Education Code (TEC), §42.006 (a-2), that require additional PEIMS reporting. SB 490 requires the reporting of the availability of school counselors at each campus, and SB 1404 requires reporting of the availability of expanded learning opportunities and the number of students participating in each category at each campus. HB 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, transferred language from TEC, §42.006, to new §48.009. HB 3 amended the requirement regarding reporting of expanded learning opportunities to remove the requirement that districts report the number of students participating in each of the categories of expanded learning opportunities listed in TEC, §33.252(b).
Adopted new 19 TAC §61.1026 requires school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to annually report the availability of school counselors at each campus. The adopted rule also requires school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to annually report the availability of expanded learning opportunities. The adopted rule defines each category of expanded learning opportunity to assist districts in accurately and consistently reporting this information.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began February 14, 2020, and ended March 16, 2020. Following is a summary of public comments received and corresponding agency responses.
Comment: A school district trustee commented that the distinction between academic skill-building and tutoring and small group instruction is not clear and suggested that "learning activities designed to accomplish X, Y, Z" would be easier to understand.
Agency Response: The agency disagrees and maintains language as proposed. Subsection (b)(2)(C) defines tutoring as one-on-one or small group instruction, led by a certified teacher, that provides supplemental content instruction or homework help to support student mastery of academic material and that does not include academic skill-building activities. Subsection (b)(2)(E) defines academic skill-building as compensatory education, test-taking skills, and related academic skill-building, and that does not include tutoring and homework help.
Comment: An assistant superintendent commented that reporting availability of school counselors is a good idea, especially with the current focus on school safety, mental health, and social and emotional learning. The commenter requested that the agency consider ways to make sure counselors are reported and coded as a positive and not a negative to the campus and district in terms of being counted as administrative or non-administrative.
Agency Response: The agency agrees that reporting of counselors is appropriate. The agency offers the following clarification. Reporting of counselors as administrative or non-administrative positions is outside the scope of the proposed rulemaking.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The new section is adopted under Texas Education Code (TEC), §33.252, whichoutlines the types of expanded learning opportunities that may beprovided by school districts and open-enrollment charter schools andthe manner in which expanded learning opportunities may be offered;and TEC, §48.009, as transferred, redesignated, and amended by HB 3,86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which requires the commissioner to byrule require each school district and open-enrollment charter schoolto report through PEIMS information regarding the availability ofschool counselors at each campus and the availability of expandedlearning opportunities as described by TEC, §33.252.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The new section implements Texas Education Code, §33.252 and §48.009, as transferred, redesignated, and amended by HB 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on August 12, 2020.
TRD-202003349
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: September 1, 2020
Proposal publication date: February 14, 2020
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497
SUBCHAPTER AA. ACCOUNTABILITY AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) adopts an amendment to §97.1003, concerning local accountability systems. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the June 12, 2020 issue of the Texas Register (45 TexReg 3969) and will not be republished. The adopted amendment addresses the enforceable aspects of the local accountability system and removes the local accountability system manual from rule.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: Texas Education Code, §39.0544, establishes the local accountability system to allow school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to develop local accountability plans for their campuses. Similar to the ratings from the state accountability rating system, a school district's local accountability plan provides stakeholders with detailed information about school performance and progress over time. Local accountability plans may vary by school type (such as elementary school, middle school, high school, or Kindergarten-Grade 12) and by school group but must apply equally to all campuses as applicable by school type and group. Through the creation and publication of a local accountability plan based on campus needs and goals, a school district communicates priorities and demonstrates a commitment to achieving the components in the plan. The dissemination of local accountability plan ratings by TEA and the school district signifies the importance of the local goals and documents progress at the campus level.
Currently, §97.1003 contains guidance to school districts through the local accountability system manual adopted in rule as a figure. The adopted amendment removes the figure from rule and instead provides specific information for each statutory requirement to address elements that will be enforced.
Subsection (a) is amended to remove language referencing the local accountability system manual and establish that the system may be used by school districts and open-enrollment charter schools.
New subsection (b)(1) clarifies statutory language that describes locally developed domains or sets of accountability measures. In addition, the new paragraph establishes that components within a local accountability plan must be assigned to domains and weighted.
Under new subsection (b), paragraphs (2) and (3) describe determination of campus eligibility to receive local accountability ratings and when local and state ratings may be combined. Subsection (b)(3) specifies eligibility to combine state and local accountability ratings for campuses that do not receive a state rating other than as a paired campus.
New subsection (b)(4) establishes that school districts must create local accountability plans based on school type and group.
New subsection (c) clarifies the range of weighting that may be applied to individual components in a local accountability plan.
New subsection (d) specifies that school districts must create a campus rating scale that provides differentiation based on current achievement levels. The new language provides additional guidance for school districts on how to select components for inclusion in a local accountability plan that allow room for growth. New subsection (d)(2) specifies that a plan may include up to one component where current baseline levels are not used to set the campus rating scale. This change from the current system addresses input from school districts.
New subsection (e) defines reliability and validity in terms of components included in a local accountability plan. The new language was added in response to school district input and requests for clarification.
New subsection (f) requires that calculations for each plan component and overall performance ratings must be capable of being audited by a third party. The new subsection provides guidance on the standard scale to be used and how to convert categorical, or noncontinuous, data to a scale score. The new subsection also establishes the submission date for local accountability plan component, domain, and overall scaled scores and ratings to TEA; addresses the audit process and requirements for school districts to maintain documentation of local accountability plans; establishes responsibility for the accuracy and quality of data used to determine local accountability ratings; and provides information relating to appeals.
New subsection (g) requires school districts to post certain information about their local accountability ratings on their websites.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began June 12, 2020, and ended on July 27, 2020. Following is a summary of public comments received and corresponding agency responses.
Comment: Disability Rights Texas (DRTx) commented that the proposed five domains should be revised to include an additional domain for a total of six allowable domains. The proposed domain would be for special populations.
Response: The agency disagrees with the inclusion of an additional domain. The domains were selected with input from stakeholders. The existing domains are flexible in nature, which allows for the inclusion of components related to special populations within the existing domains.
Comment: DRTx commented that local accountability plans developed by school districts should be required to address how students with disabilities are included.
Response: The agency disagrees with adding a provision to mandate inclusion of students with disabilities in local accountability plans. The statutory requirements do not specifically address students with disabilities. School districts develop local accountability plans based on local priorities and initiatives. The rule does not prohibit, nor mandate, school district choice regarding students with disabilities.
Comment: DRTx commented that within the five existing domains (academics, culture and climate, extra- and co-curricular, future-ready learning, and locally determined), school districts should be required to include data on students with disabilities.
Response: The agency disagrees. The local accountability system allows for school district choice and does not mandate inclusion of individual groups of students. STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code (TEC), §39.0544, which requires the commissioner to adopt rules regarding the assignment of campus performance ratings by school districts and open-enrollment charter schools through a local accountability system.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The amendment implements Texas Education Code, §39.0544.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on August 17, 2020.
TRD-202003387
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: September 6, 2020
Proposal publication date: June 12, 2020
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497
(Editor's note: In accordance with Texas Government Code, §2002.014, which permits the omission of material which is "cumbersome, expensive, or otherwise inexpedient," the figure in 19 TAC §97.1005(b) is not included in the print version of the Texas Register. The figure is available in the on-line version of the August 28, 2020, issue of the Texas Register.)
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) adopts an amendment to §97.1005, concerning results driven accountability. The amendment is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 22, 2020 issue of the Texas Register (45 TexReg 3418) and will be republished. The adopted amendment reflects changes to the 2020 Results Driven Accountability (RDA) Manual.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: House Bill (HB) 3459, 78th Texas Legislature, 2003, added Texas Education Code (TEC), §7.027, limiting and redirecting monitoring done by the TEA to that required to ensure school district and charter school compliance with federal law and regulations; financial accountability, including compliance with grant requirements; and data integrity for purposes of the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) and accountability under TEC, Chapter 39. Legislation passed in 2005 renumbered TEC, §7.027, to TEC, §7.028. To meet this monitoring requirement, TEA developed the Performance Based Monitoring Analysis System (PBMAS), later renamed as Results Driven Accountability in 2019, which is used in conjunction with other evaluation systems to monitor performance of certain populations of students and the program effectiveness of special programs in school districts and charter schools.
TEA has adopted its PBMAS manual in rule since 2005 and the RDA manual in rule since 2019. The RDA manual outlines a dynamic system that evolves over time, so the specific criteria and calculations for monitoring student performance and program effectiveness may differ from year to year. The intent is to update 19 TAC §97.1005 annually to refer to the most recently published RDA manual.
The adopted amendment to §97.1005 updates the rule by repealing the 2019 RDA Manual currently included as Figure: 19 TAC §97.1005(b) and replacing it with the 2020 RDA Manual as Figure: 19 TAC §97.1005(b). Sections I-III describe the specific criteria and calculations that are used to assign 2020 RDA performance levels.
The 2020 RDA Manual includes several key changes from the 2019 framework. Revisions to the RDA framework include the following.
Overall, the format of the RDA manual has changed. Indicator grouping under three identified domains has created a shift in some indicators to be reordered and numbered. Domain I captures indicators of Academic Achievement; Domain II captures indicators of Post-Secondary Readiness; and Domain III captures indicators of Disproportionate Analysis.
TEA has consolidated and expanded its monitoring capacity for the special education program and the bilingual education, English as a second language, and English learner (BE/ESL/EL) program. Due to changes in monitoring structures and requirements for certain federal and state programs, and to eliminate duplication of monitoring selection processes, some program areas have been removed from the RDA report. These include career and technical education (CTE), Title I - Part A, and Title I - Part C (Education of Migratory Students). These programs continue to be monitored by other offices at TEA and through Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) reporting and requirements. The indicators that are removed from the manual were no longer used in making monitoring decisions. The remaining program areas for certain student populations captured under the former ESSA section of the 2019 RDA Manual remain but are captured in the manual as other special populations (OSP) and contain indicators inclusive of students in foster care, students experiencing homelessness, and military-connected students.
Bilingual Education, English as a Second Language, and English Learners (BE/ESL/ELs)
In 2019, certain BE/ESL indicators were provided as "Report Only" due to various changes in the data sources and processing requirements and were not assigned indicator performance levels (PLs). For 2020, new cut points have been assigned that will allow for PLs to be assigned for the following indicators: BE/ESL/EL Indicator #1(i-v): BE STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate; BE/ESL/EL Indicator #2(i-v): ESL STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate; BE/ESL/EL Indicator #6(i-iv): EL STAAR EOC Passing Rate; BE/ESL/EL Indicator #7: TELPAS Reading Beginning Proficiency Level Rate; and BE/ESL/EL Indicator #8: TELPAS Composite Rating Levels for Students in U.S. Schools Multiple Years.
Additionally for 2020, two new indicators are included as "Report Only" in the following: BE/ESL/EL Indicator #4: EL Dyslexia STAAR 3-8 Reading Passing Rate; and BE/ESL/EL Indicator #11: EL Dyslexia Representation (Ages 6-21).
Other Special Populations (OSP)
In 2019, certain student populations were reported under the ESSA section of the RDA manual. Title 1 - Part A and migrant have been removed while students in foster care, students experiencing homelessness, and military-connected students remain and are combined as OSP for reporting purposes and PL assignments. The decision to combine these three student populations for reporting and analysis is based on a high LEA exclusion rate due to small size, which is an inability to meet minimum size requirements (MSR) within each of the student groups for PL assignments. Although PL assignments are made at the combined OSP level, each of the three included separate student populations are reported for disaggregated reporting but are not assigned individual PLs.
LEAs that receive a PL 3 or PL 4 for any indicator in the 2020 RDA OSP report that would have otherwise not received a PL assignment in all three of the included student population groups for OSP will receive a Hold Harmless (HH) rating for the following indicators: OSP Indicator #1(i-v): OSP STAAR 3-8 Passing Rate; OSP Indicator #3(i-v): OSP STAAR EOC Passing Rate; OSP Indicator #4: OSP Graduation Rate; and OSP Indicator #5: OSP Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12).
Additionally for 2020, two new indicators are included as "Report Only" in the following: OSP Indicator #2: OSP Dyslexia STAAR 3-8 Reading Passing Rate and OSP Indicator #6: OSP Dyslexia Representation (Ages 6-21).
Special Education (SPED)
To align with state and federal accountability calculation requirements in reporting the rate of students participating in the STAAR Alternate 2, SPED Indicator #5: SPED STAAR Alternate 2 Participation Rate has changed and now includes calculations for three reported subject areas: mathematics, science, and reading/ELA. This indicator remains as a "Report Only" indicator.
Additionally for 2020, two new indicators are included as "Report Only" in the following: SPED Indicator #2: SPED Dyslexia STAAR 3-8 Reading Passing Rate and SPED Indicator #8: SPED Dyslexia Representation (Ages 6-21).
On March 16, 2020, Governor Greg Abbott waived the State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR®) testing requirements for the 2019-2020 school year due to extensive school closures relating to the COVID-19 nationwide pandemic event. Indicators specific to STAAR® testing proficiency, participation, or other reliance on non-existing 2019-2020 STAAR® data will not receive 2020 RDA performance levels for those indicators. Texas's commitment to provide educators and parents with reliable information on student outcomes for mastery of grade-level content as measured on the STAAR® in future years will continue. However, for the 2019-2020 school year, no data will be available for these indicators: BE/ESL/EL Indicators #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, and #8; OSP Indicators #1, #2, and #3; and SPED Indicators #1, #2, #3, #4, and #5. When there is insufficient data to make monitoring decisions, TEA will carry over its monitoring activities from the prior year.
The 2020 RDA Manual includes minor technical edits at adoption for clarity. The technical edits impacted the following sections: the description of PLs on pages 9 and 10; the RDA PL Assignment and SA Determination Process graphic on page 12 in the "Apply Standard Analysis" box; Data Note 11 on page 25; the denominator for the calculation of Indicator #6: EL STAAR EOC Passing Rate on page 31; the numerator and denominator for the calculation of Indicator #7: TELPAS Reading Beginning Proficiency Level Rate on page 32; the numerator for the calculation of Indicator #8: TELPAS Composite Rating Levels for Students in U.S. Schools Multiple Years on page 33; the data source for Indicator #11: EL Dyslexia Representation (Ages 6-21) on page 36; the description of Indicator #4: OSP Graduation Rate on page 42; the numerator for the calculation of Indicator #5: OSP Annual Dropout Rate (Grades 7-12) on page 43; Data Note 14 on page 46; and the data source for Indicator #8: SPED Dyslexia Representation (Ages 6-21) on page 55.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began May 22, 2020, and ended June 22, 2020, and included public hearings on June 9 and 10, 2020. Following is a summary of public comments received, including testimony given during the public hearings, and corresponding agency responses.
Comment: Disability Rights Texas (DRTx) expressed concerns regarding Bilingual Education Indicator #11, Other Special Populations Indicator #6, and Special Education Indicator #8. DRTx expressed support for collection of data on students with dyslexia but expressed concern with transparency for future unintended consequences for students with dyslexia if arbitrary performance levels are set for these indicators. DRTx proposed to not include these indicators in the RDA 2020 Manual and reporting or, if TEA continues to include these indicators, that they remain "report only" in the future.
Response: TEA agrees with DRTx in its support for data collection on students with dyslexia and its desire to avoid unintended consequences for students with dyslexia via arbitrary performance levels in an RDA system or framework. However, TEA disagrees with not including these indicators in the 2020 RDA Manual and report. Following a January 11, 2018 letter of noncompliance from the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and multiple stakeholder roundtable meetings where stakeholders expressed concerns regarding required Child Find activities under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in the state specific to students with dyslexia, TEA agreed to multiple steps and actions to communicate Child Find requirements, including for students suspected to have dyslexia as a qualifying condition of a specific learning disability and in need of special education and related services. Additionally, during the 86th Texas legislature, SB 2075 amended TEC, §28.006, requiring auditing and monitoring actions by TEA regarding certain dyslexia screening and parent notification requirements. Inclusion of "report only" indicators in RDA provides local educational agencies (LEAs) with an opportunity review current performance and plan ahead and supports TEA's efforts in carrying out its monitoring requirements described in 34 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §300.600. TEA has included these indicators as "report only" for the 2020 RDA report, as described in the 2020 RDA Manual, consistent with all year one "new" designated indicators in order to publicly report and engage with stakeholders. TEA will continue implementing the Guiding Principles of the RDA found on page 3 of the 2020 RDA Manual before making decisions on these indicators of "report only" or potential performance level assignments in future RDA manuals and subsequent reports.
Comment: Texans for Special Education Reform (TxSER) expressed concern with the number of LEAs excluded in assignment of PLs within the RDA reporting system based on the minimum size requirements (MSR). TxSER requested the MSR be changed from 30 to 25 to align with the accountability rating system under 19 TAC §97.1001.
Response: TEA disagrees with making the commenter's suggested change to the 2020 RDA Manual and report based on the number of LEA exclusions. In implementing Guiding Principles of the RDA: Principle 3: Protects Children and Families, maximum inclusion is realized by using appropriate alternatives to analyze the performance of LEAs with small numbers of students. The MSR can be met either in the current year or through the aggregation of numerators and denominators over the most recent two years, if applicable. Furthermore, as outlined on pages 10-13 of the 2020 RDA Manual, application of a special analysis for group sizes of 15-29 occurs to ensure maximum inclusion for performance level assignments. TEA recognizes TxSER's concern for MSR alignment with the accountability rating system under 19 TAC §97.1001 and plans to engage stakeholders relevant to alignment of systems where possible in the 2020-2021 school year.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code (TEC), §7.021(b)(1), which authorizes the Texas Education Agency (TEA) to administer and monitor compliance with education programs required by federal or state law, including federal funding and state funding for those programs; TEC, §7.028, as amended by House Bill (HB) 3, and Senate Bill (SB) 2075, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, authorizes the TEA to monitor as necessary to ensure school district and charter school compliance with federal law and regulations, financial integrity and data integrity. Section 7.028(a) also authorizes the TEA to monitor special education programs for compliance with state and federal laws. Section 7.028 also authorizes the agency to monitor school district and charter schools through its investigative process; TEC, §12.056, as amended by HB 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which requires that a campus or program for which a charter is granted under the TEC, Chapter 12, Subchapter C, is subject to any prohibition relating to the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS) to the extent necessary to monitor compliance with the TEC, Chapter 12, Subchapter C, as determined by the commissioner; high school graduation under the TEC, §28.025; special education programs under the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter A; bilingual education under the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter B; and public school accountability under the TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapters B, C, D, F, and J, and Chapter 39A; TEC, §12.104, as amended by SB 11, SB 213, SB 372, HB 3, HB 1597, and HB 4170, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which states that a charter granted under the TEC, Chapter 12, Subchapter D, is subject to a prohibition, restriction, or requirement, as applicable, imposed by the TEC, Title 2, or a rule adopted under the TEC, Title 2, relating to the PEIMS to the extent necessary to monitor compliance with the TEC, Chapter 12, Subchapter D, as determined by the commissioner; high school graduation requirements under the TEC, §28.025; special education programs under the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter A; bilingual education under the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter B; discipline management practices or behavior management techniques under the TEC, §37.0021; public school accountability under the TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapters B, C, D, F, G, and J, and Chapter 39A; and intensive programs of instruction under the TEC, §28.0213; TEC, §29.001, as amended by HB 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which authorizes the TEA to effectively monitor all local educational agencies (LEAs) to ensure that rules relating to the delivery of services to children with disabilities are applied in a consistent and uniform manner, to ensure that LEAs are complying with those rules, and to ensure that specific reports filed by LEAs are accurate and complete; TEC, §29.0011(b), which authorizes the TEA to meet the requirements under (1) 20 U.S.C. Section 1418(d) and its implementing regulations to collect and examine data to determine whether significant disproportionality based on race or ethnicity is occurring in the state and in the school districts and open-enrollment charter schools in the state with respect to the: (A) Identification of children as children with disabilities, including the identification of children as children with particular impairments; (B) Placement of children with disabilities in particular educational settings; and (C) Incidence, duration, and type of disciplinary actions taken against children with disabilities including suspensions or expulsions; or (2) 20 U.S.C. Section 1416(a)(3)(C) and its implementing regulations to address in the statewide plan the percentage of schools with disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services and in specific disability categories that results from inappropriate identification; TEC, §29.010(a), which authorizes the TEA to adopt and implement a comprehensive system for monitoring LEA compliance with federal and state laws relating to special education, including ongoing analysis of LEA special education data; TEC, §29.062, which authorizes the TEA to evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of LEA programs and apply sanctions concerning students with limited English proficiency; TEC, §29.066, which authorizes PEIMS reporting requirements for school districts that are required to offer bilingual education or special language programs to include the following information in the district's PEIMS report: (1) demographic information, as determined by the commissioner, on students enrolled in district bilingual education or special language programs; (2) the number and percentage of students enrolled in each instructional model of a bilingual education or special language program offered by the district; and (3) the number and percentage of students identified as students of limited English proficiency who do not receive specialized instruction; TEC, §29.182, which authorizes the State Plan for Career and Technology Education to ensure the state complies with requirements for supplemental federal career and technology funding; TEC, §39.051 and §39.052, which authorize the commissioner to determine criteria for accreditation statuses and to determine the accreditation status of each school district and open-enrollment charter school; TEC, §39.053, as amended by HB 330, HB 1051, and HB 4170, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which authorizes the commissioner to adopt a set of indicators of the quality of learning and achievement and requires the commissioner to periodically review the indicators for consideration of appropriate revisions; TEC, §39.054(b-1), which authorizes the TEA to consider the effectiveness of district programs for special populations, including career and technical education programs, when determining accreditation statuses; TEC, §39.0541, which authorizes the commissioner to adopt indicators and standards under the TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapter C, at any time during a school year before the evaluation of a school district or campus; TEC, §§39.056, 39.057, and 39.058, which authorize the commissioner to adopt procedures relating to monitoring reviews and special accreditation investigations; TEC, §39A.001, which authorizes the commissioner to take any of the actions authorized by the TEC, Chapter 39A, Subchapter A, to the extent the commissioner determines necessary if a school does not satisfy the academic performance standards under the TEC, §39.053 or §39.054, or based upon a special accreditation investigation; TEC, §39A.002, as amended by HB 4170, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which authorizes the commissioner to take certain actions if a school district becomes subject to commissioner action under the TEC, §39A.001; TEC, §39A.004, which authorizes the commissioner to appoint a board of managers to exercise the powers and duties of a school district's board of trustees if the district is subject to commissioner action under the TEC, §39A.001, and has a current accreditation status of accredited-warned or accredited-probation; or fails to satisfy any standard under the TEC, §39.054(e); or fails to satisfy any financial accountability standard; TEC, §39A.005, which authorizes the commissioner to revoke school accreditation if the district is subject to the TEC, §39A.001, and, for two consecutive school years has received an accreditation status of accredited-warned or accredited-probation, failed to satisfy any standard under the TEC, §39.054(e), or has failed to satisfy a financial performance standard; TEC, §39A.007, which authorizes the commissioner to impose a sanction designed to improve high school completion rates if the district has failed to satisfy any standard under the TEC, §39.054(e), due to high school completion rates; TEC, §39A.051, which authorizes the commissioner to take action based on campus performance that is below any standard under the TEC, §39.054(e); and TEC, §39A.063, which authorizes the commissioner to accept substantially similar intervention measures as required by federal accountability measures in compliance with the TEC, Chapter 39A.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The amendment implements Texas Education Code, §§7.021, 7.028, 12.056, 12.104, 29.001, 29.0011(b), 29.010(a), 29.062, 29.066, 29.182, 39.051, 39.052, 39.053, 39.054(b-1), 39.0541, 39.056, 39.057, 39.058, 39A.001, 39A.002, 39A.004, 39A.005, 39A.007, 39A.051, and 39A.063.
§97.1005.Results Driven Accountability.
(a) In accordance with Texas Education Code, §7.028(a), the purpose of the Results Driven Accountability (RDA) framework is to evaluate and report annually on the performance of school districts and charter schools for certain populations of students included in selected program areas. The performance of a school district or charter school is included on the RDA report through indicators of student performance and program effectiveness and corresponding performance levels established by the commissioner of education.
(b) The assignment of performance levels for school districts and charter schools in the 2020 RDA report is based on specific criteria and calculations, which are described in the 2020 RDA Manual provided in this subsection.
Figure: 19 TAC §97.1005(b) (.pdf)
(c) The specific criteria and calculations used in the RDA framework will be established annually by the commissioner of education and communicated to all school districts and charter schools.
(d) The specific criteria and calculations used in the annual RDA manual adopted for prior school years will remain in effect for all purposes, including accountability and performance monitoring, data standards, and audits, with respect to those school years.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on August 12, 2020.
TRD-202003350
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: September 1, 2020
Proposal publication date: May 22, 2020
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497
SUBCHAPTER CC. COMMISSIONER'S RULES CONCERNING SAFE SCHOOLS
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) adopts new §103.1209, concerning mandatory school drills. The new section is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 29, 2020 issue of the Texas Register (45 TexReg 3562) and will be republished. The adopted new section implements Senate Bill (SB) 11, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which mandated the adoption of procedures for evacuating school property and designation of the number and type of school drills.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: Texas Education Code (TEC), Chapter 37, Subchapter D, addresses the protection of school buildings and grounds. To this subchapter, SB 11, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, added TEC, §37.114, which mandates emergency evacuations and school drills. Adopted new §103.1209 implements the new statute by establishing requirements and definitions and by designating the frequency of mandatory school drills.
New subsection (a) requires school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to conduct emergency safety drills. This requirement helps school districts and open-enrollment charter schools practice critical drills to keep students, staff, and visitors safe during an actual emergency.
Adopted new subsection (b) defines the drills that school districts and open-enrollment charter schools are required to conduct every school year. Due to nuanced differences between the drills, it is important to define the different types of drills and the situations that trigger the drills.
In response to public comment, subsection (b) was modified at adoption. The definitions for "secure (lockout)" and "lockdown" were clarified to specify that secure (lockout) is intended to secure the perimeter of school buildings and grounds to deny entry, and lockdown is intended to secure interior portions of school buildings and grounds.
Also in response to public comment, references to the "hold" drill requirement were removed from subsections (b) and (c) at adoption.
Adopted new subsection (c) identifies the minimum frequency with which each drill must be conducted during the academic school year. This provides school districts and open-enrollment charter schools with the guidance needed on the number of drills to be conducted in one school year.
In response to public comment, subsection (c) was modified at adoption to refer to the maximum number of drills specified in TEC, §37.114(2).
Also in response to public comment, subsection (c)(6) was modified at adoption to increase the frequency of fire evacuation drills to four per school year or two per semester, and additional language was added to specify that school districts and open-enrollment charter schools should consult their local fire marshal and comply with any requirements and recommendations.
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began May 29, 2020, and ended July 13, 2020. Following is a summary of public comments received and corresponding agency responses.
Comment: A school district employee questioned how the rule has no data or reporting impact and asked if the required drills would need to be reported in the state safety and security audits required under TEC, §37.108.
Response: The agency provides the following clarification. Section 103.1209 does not require any reporting or data collection. However, TEC, §37.108, requires multiple emergency management items to be reported to the Texas School Safety Center (TxSSC) as part of the school safety audit process, including the number of drills conducted.
Comment: A school district employee expressed concerns with how the terms "lockout" and "lockdown" are defined. The commenter stated that both definitions reference securing the "grounds," but that, in practice and for reasons of safety, these actions should not indicate that the grounds need to be secured.
Response: The agency disagrees with removing reference to school grounds because any students and staff out of doors on school grounds would also need to be secured, depending on the context and location of the threat. However, language has been added at adoption to the definitions of "secure (lockout)" and "lockdown" to differentiate between perimeter security and interior security.
Comment: A school district employee commented that the rule should not list a bomb threat as an example of when an evacuation should always be used.
Response: The agency disagrees with removing bomb threat as an example of when an evacuation may need to occur. Any threat, including a bomb threat, would need to be evaluated prior to making a decision to evacuate the school facility.
Comment: Two local fire marshals, the State of Texas Fire Marshal, and two school district employees commented that limiting the maximum number of total drills per year to eight and only having one fire drill per year is too infrequent. The State of Texas Fire Marshal additionally commented that the number of fire drills should be two per semester for a total of four per year.
Response: The agency agrees. Subsection (c) was modified at adoption to specify that the number of general drills listed in the rule is a minimum requirement rather than a maximum. In addition, the number of fire drills was increased at adoption to two per semester for a total of four fire drills per school year.
Comment: One school district emergency manager stated that the reduction of fire drills to one time per year will eliminate drill fatigue and encourage drill participation in other remaining emergency drills.
Response: The agency agrees that a reduction of fire drills could relieve drill fatigue. However, in response to other comments, the number of fire drills was increased at adoption to two per semester for a total of four fire drills per school year.
Comment: Texas State Teachers Association commented that the recommended frequency and type of mandatory school drills exceeds the legislative intent and makes recommendations that are unnecessary and not in the best interest of students.
Response: The agency agrees in part and disagrees in part. TEC, §37.114, states that the number of drills the agency lists in its rule cannot exceed eight per semester, which amounts to sixteen per school year. The new rule has been modified at adoption to remove the "hold" drill requirement, but the remaining drills listed in the rule fall within the parameters set forth in TEC, §37.114.
Comment: The Texas-American Federation of Teachers commented that the rule needs to take into consideration the psychological toll on students during and after the drills, particularly the lockdown and lockout drills, and recommended related best practices and supports. Additionally, the commenter stated that several charter schools, with appointed boards, do not have these mandatory safety plans and recommended that TEA staff audit or require charters to submit their actual plans to TEA.
Response: The agency disagrees. TEC, §37.114, does not authorize the agency to require schools to provide additional education for staff, students, and parents prior to and after the drills. In addition, the statute does not authorize the agency to mandate that schools provide counselors during drills, nor does the statute authorize the agency to audit schools' safety plans or require schools to submit their plans to TEA. However, TEC, §37.108, does require schools to conduct audits and submit their emergency operations plans to the TxSSC. Finally, although the best practices and supports referenced by the commenter fall outside the scope of this rule, the agency may issue guidance on this topic in the future.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The new section is adopted under Texas Education Code, §37.114, as added by Senate Bill 11, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019, which requires the commissioner to adopt rules regarding emergency evacuations and drills, in consultation with the state fire marshal and Texas School Safety Center.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The new section implements Texas Education Code, §37.114, as added by Senate Bill 11, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019.
§103.1209.Mandatory School Drills.
(a) Requirement. Each school district and open-enrollment charter school shall conduct emergency safety drills in accordance with Texas Education Code (TEC), §37.114.
(b) Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
(1) Drill--A set of procedures that test a single, specific operation or function. Drill examples include evacuating for a fire or locking down from an internal threat.
(2) Secure (Lockout)--A response action schools take to secure the perimeter of school buildings and grounds during incidents that pose a threat or hazard outside of the school building. Secure (Lockout) uses the security of the physical facility to act as protection to deny entry.
(3) Lockdown--A response action schools take to secure interior portions of school buildings and grounds during incidents that pose an immediate threat of violence inside the school. The primary objective is to quickly ensure all school students, staff, and visitors are secured away from immediate danger.
(4) Evacuate--A response action schools take to quickly move students and staff from one place to another. The primary objective of an evacuation is to ensure that all staff, students, and visitors can quickly move away from the threat. Evacuation examples include a bomb threat or internal gas leak.
(5) Shelter-in-place for hazmat--A response action schools take to quickly move students, staff, and visitors indoors, perhaps for an extended period of time, because it is safer inside the building than outside. Affected individuals may be required to move to rooms without windows or to rooms that can be sealed. Shelter-in-place for hazmat examples include train derailment with chemical release or smoke from a nearby fire.
(6) Shelter for severe weather--A response action schools take to quickly move students, staff, and visitors indoors, perhaps for an extended period of time, because it is safer inside the building than outside. For severe weather, depending on the type and/or threat level (watch versus warning), affected individuals may be required to move to rooms without windows on the lowest floor possible or to a weather shelter.
(7) Fire evacuation drill--A method of practicing how a building would be vacated in the event of a fire. The purpose of fire drills in buildings is to ensure that everyone knows how to exit safely as quickly as possible.
(c) Frequency. TEC, §37.114(2), requires the commissioner of education to designate the number of mandatory school drills to be conducted each semester of the school year, not to exceed eight drills each semester and sixteen drills for the entire school year. Neither this rule, nor the law, precludes a school district or an open-enrollment charter school from conducting more drills as deemed necessary and appropriate by the district or charter school. Following is the required minimum frequency of drills by type.
(1) Secure (Lockout)--One per school year.
(2) Lockdown--Two per school year or once per semester.
(3) Evacuate--One per school year.
(4) Shelter-in-place for hazmat--One per school year.
(5) Shelter for severe weather--One per school year.
(6) Fire evacuation drill-- Four per school year or two per semester. In addition, school districts and open-enrollment charter schools should consult with their local fire marshal and comply with their local fire marshal's requirements and recommendations.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on August 17, 2020.
TRD-202003386
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: September 6, 2020
Proposal publication date: May 29, 2020
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497
SUBCHAPTER AA. COMMISSIONER'S RULES CONCERNING FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) adopts an amendment to §109.1001, concerning financial accountability. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 24, 2020 issue of the Texas Register (45 TexReg 2633) and will not be republished. The adopted amendment updates financial accountability rating information and rating worksheets for school districts and open-enrollment charter schools.
REASONED JUSTIFICATION: Section 109.1001 includes the financial accountability rating system and rating worksheets that explain the indicators that TEA will analyze to assign financial accountability ratings for school districts and open-enrollment charter schools. The rule also specifies the minimum financial accountability rating information that a school district or an open-enrollment charter school is to report to parents and taxpayers in the district.
The adopted amendment clarifies the financial accountability rating indicators terminology used to determine each school district's rating for the 2019-2020 rating year and subsequent years by revising the ratings worksheet calculations in §109.1001(e)(4), (e)(5), (f)(4), and (f)(5). The adopted worksheets, dated April 2020, differ from the worksheets dated June 2019 as follows.
Figure: 19 TAC §109.1001(e)(4)
Indicator 4 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
Indicators 5 and 8 were revised to clarify terminology that aligns with the calculation used to score the indicator when student membership increases.
The determination of school district rating chart in the worksheet was revised to update reference to Texas Education Code (TEC), Chapter 49, instead of Chapter 41, as that chapter was transferred and redesignated by House Bill (HB) 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019.
Figure: 19 TAC §109.1001(e)(5)
Indicator 4 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
Indicators 5 and 11 was revised to clarify terminology that aligns with the calculation used to score the indicator when student membership increases.
Indicator 6 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
Indicators 15 and 19 were revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the worksheets and calculation graphics.
The determination of points chart in the worksheet was revised to correct misspelled terminology for indicator 15.
The determination of school district rating chart in the worksheet was revised to update reference to TEC, Chapter 49, instead of Chapter 41, as that chapter was transferred and redesignated by HB 3, 86th Texas Legislature, 2019.
Figure: 19 TAC §109.1001(f)(4)
Indicator 4 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
Indicators 5 and 8 were revised to clarify terminology that aligns with the calculation used to score the indicator when student membership increases.
Figure: 19 TAC §109.1001(f)(5)
Indicator 4 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
Indicators 5 and 11 were revised to clarify terminology that aligns with the calculation used to score the indicator when student membership increases.
Indicator 20 was revised to correct misspelled terminology used in the calculation worksheets.
The adopted amendment updates statutory references in subsections (i) and (k).
SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND AGENCY RESPONSES: The public comment period on the proposal began April 24, 2020 and ended June 8, 2020. No public comments were received.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY. The amendment is adopted under Texas Education Code (TEC), §12.104, which subjects open-enrollment charter schools to the prohibitions, restrictions, or requirements relating to public school accountability under TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapters B, C, D, F, G, and J, and TEC, Chapter 39A; TEC, §39.082, which requires the commissioner to develop and implement a financial accountability rating system for public schools and establishes certain minimum requirements for the system, including an appeals process; TEC, §39.083, which requires the commissioner to include in the financial accountability system procedures for public schools to report and receive public comment on an annual financial management report; TEC, §39.085, which requires the commissioner to adopt rules to implement TEC, Chapter 39, Subchapter D, which addresses financial accountability for public schools; and TEC, §39.151, which requires the commissioner to provide a process by which a district or charter school can challenge an agency decision related to academic or financial accountability under TEC, Chapter 39. This process must include a committee to make recommendations to the commissioner. These provisions collectively authorize and require the commissioner to adopt the financial accountability system rules, which implement each requirement of statute applicable to districts and open-enrollment charter schools.
CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE. The amendment implements Texas Education Code, §§12.104, 39.082, 39.083, 39.085, and 39.151.
The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the adoption and found it to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on August 12, 2020.
TRD-202003351
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Director, Rulemaking
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: September 1, 2020
Proposal publication date: April 24, 2020
For further information, please call: (512) 475-1497