Testimony by the Staff
of the
Florida Catholic Conference

I.  Introduction

    Good afternoon. My name is Larry Keough. I am the associate for education for the Florida Catholic Conference and legislative advocate for Florida Catholic Schools.   I thank Phil Handy, as the chairman of the task force, John Winn, as executive director, and task force members for providing me with the opportunity to speak this afternoon.

    Before I delve into my testimony, please note that I am speaking on behalf of Florida Catholic schools, which represent the largest system of nonpublic schools in the state with 93,000 plus students in 215 schools. However, I do not speak for all K-12 nonpublic school associations. There are two gentlemen here today who have been represented nonpublic school associations for a long time. I’d like to recognize (point to them, where they are sitting) Mr. Skardon Bliss, who represents the Florida Council of Independent Schools and is the president of the Florida Academic Association of Nonpublic schools, which represents most of the 290,000 students in nonpublic schools, and Dr. Howard Burke, who represents the Florida Association of Christian Colleges and Schools and is the vice president of FAANS.

    Mr. Chairman, I believe it would be important for the Task Force to allocate time to hear from Mr. Bliss and Dr. Burke.

II. Meaningful Change is never easy

    I submit to each of you that it is part of the human psyche to be uneasy with significant change. Change is difficult because it upsets the status quo and our comfort levels. No one wants to be in the throes of uncertainty. It is our belief that the prospect of meaningful change should not be rejected, but pursued with caution to determine if  has great potential to achieve salutary results.

    The Florida Catholic school community often has been in the forefront of change. Bishop Verot recruited the Sisters of Joseph from France in the late 1800s to educate poor black children in St. Augustine. Catholic school teachers were arrested in the early 1900s for teaching black children. In the wake of the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared segregation as unconstitutional in state schools, many of our Catholic schools not only supported the Brown decision, but acted on it by making greater efforts to reach out to minority students.

    And more recently, the Catholic Church has steadfastly supported parents fundamental right to select schools without financial burden in the best interest of their children.

    We advocated for Opportunity Scholarship and then implemented the program in Pensacola. We supported the pilot program in Sarasota for children with disabilities and advocated for and helped to implement the statewide Scholarship Program for Students with Disabilities.

    So, when the Blue Ribbon’s recommendation was presented to us, we studied and sought as much information as possible to make an informed-responsible decision. In that process, we consulted with legislative staff, legislators, Brenda Dickinson, Skardon Bliss and Howard Burke.

    We decided to support Bill 2263 upon representation that this would be a once in a lifetime opportunity for inequity issues in education to be corrected and assurance that our input would be seriously considered as the Task Force moved forward with its recommendations.

    As I mentioned, approximately 290,000 students attend nonpublic schools in Florida, saving the state more than $1 billion annually. Unfortunately, thousands of children in nonpublic schools each year do not receive the services they are justifiably and legally entitled to.

    Although the federally Title I Program was established in 1965 to meet the needs of at-risk students, regardless of the schools they attend, many students in nonpublic schools either to not receive the services, or begin receiving the services mid-way through the school year while their public school counterparts benefitted from the services at the beginning of the school year.

    All of the children on Opportunity Scholarships in Catholic schools helped to generate Title I funds while they were in low performing public schools. Yet not a single one of them received Title I services during the 1999-2000 school year.

    Presently, children who were receiving special needs services in a low performing public school and then utilize an Opportunity Scholarship to attend the school of their parents’ choice, do not have an individual entitlement to the special education services. This means the school district may or may not provide the services to children in need, and if the services are provided, they likely are not provided in the least restrictive environment, which is the child’s school.

    Although Florida laws indicate that children in nonpublic school are entitled to school health services, school health services are usually allocated based on the number of children in the public school system. The result is nonpublic school student often do not receive hearing and vision screening services at the local level.

    I like the direction in which the Task Force is heading as it relates to the creation of a new division for the Independent Sector.

    I believe that the new infrastructure will not produce parity unless:

• Funding is tied to policy. If President Bush is to withhold federal dollars from states that are not accountable to every student, then he and his administration may need to revise the Federal Code of Regulations. If this is the case, I believe that Florida should seriously considering block granting federal dollars at the state level for nonpublic school children so the funds go directly to whom they are intended.
  
• I believe there needs to be some sort of oversight at the state level for redress purposes when children in nonpublic schools are not receiving the services they are entitled to.

    And it would be helpful if the FDOE, Floridians for School Choice, the Administration and leadership in the House and Senate consult with representatives of the Independent Sector on the front end before moving forward with rules and legislation that impact children in the independent sector. This would be pragmatic because much can be learned from the Independent sector. Those of us in the Independent Sector know what policies are advantageous for our children and which ones are problematic.

    At this point, I am glad to answer any questions.

    Thank you.