The Arizona Attorney general is investigating Arizona Department of Education procedures allowing school voucher funds for “supplementary materials” untethered to any curriculum or documentation justifying the purchase as an educational expense.
On July 1, the Government Accountability Unit of the Solicitor General’s office sent a letter to the Empowerment Scholarship Account program Director John Ward, flagging language in the ESA Parent Handbook and program guidance, which notes supplementary materials do not require proof of a corresponding curriculum, as a potentially illegal use of public monies.
The department has since ceased allowing purchases without curriculum or documentation, and sent out a notice to parents of the change as of July 3, and is now working with the State Board of Education to implement a change in the handbook’s language.
Though the department is complying, House Speaker Ben Toma urged Superintendent Tom Horne to “scrutinize” the legal analysis by the Attorney General’s office and “reject her interpretations of law that would lead to absurd results.”
Kathryn Boughton, an assistant Attorney General, noted state law allows for use of ESA funds to purchase curricula and supplementary materials.
Statute defines curriculum as a “a course of study for content areas or grade levels, including any supplemental materials required or recommended by the curriculum, approved by the department.”
Supplemental material is not defined in statute, but a rule from the State Board of Education defines supplementary materials as “relevant materials directly related to the course of study for which they are being used that introduce content and instructional strategies or that enhance, complement, enrich, extend or support the curriculum.”
Boughton wrote that read together, the laws and rules governing the program require supplementary materials to come in tandem with curriculum, but the department’s policies in the 2023-24 Parent Handbook and the Allowable Expenses List exempt supplementary materials from curriculum requirements.
Boughton does note, though, that the Allowable Expense List includes a requirement that materials “not generally known to be educational items” require curriculum, class registration or home education attestation and the Parent Handbook holds some items may require a link with a course of study.
“Neither document, however, describes the ESA Program’s curriculum approval process nor indicates that the ESA Program confirms the curriculum prompting the purchase of the item is (1) appropriate for the qualified student as indicated by grade level or course of study and (2) is being studied by the student,” Boughton wrote. “Approving ESA funds for materials that have no nexus to the student’s actual curricular needs contradicts the intent of the program and constitutes a payment of funds made without authorization of law.”
Boughton asked Ward to cease approving supplementary materials without curriculum documentation and identify, from 2019-20 to 2-23-24, the amount of ESA funds expended on supplementary materials and the amount of funds expended on materials without curriculum documentation.
She further asked the department to identify every item approved without curriculum tie in the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school year and explain how the ESA program confirms the curriculum is appropriate.
And beyond the supplementary materials, Boughton asked for information from the department on items and funds spent on curricula material and the process the department uses to deem curricula acceptable, as well as on textbooks, which should be “required by a qualified school” and attached to curriculum per the state law and SBE rules.
In response, Ward confirmed in a July 3 letter that the department would cease allowing supplementary materials and textbooks without supporting curricula documentation and would send a response to the questions posed by the solicitor general within 60 days, though he noted the practice predates the current administration and his tenure.
The language at issue is included in the 2023-24 Parent Handbook, which was initially adopted by the State Board of Education in April 2023. In March, the State Board delayed implementation of a 2024-25 revised handbook given complaints of a lack of opportunity for input from ESA account holders
He added the department would communicate the change to ESA account holders and work with SBE to revise the 2023-24 Parent Handbook.
The same day the department sent out a notice to ESA account holders.
“ Because of these specific statutes and rule, effective immediately, ESA Holders must submit a curriculum with all supplemental materials requested or purchased,” Ward wrote in an email.”The Solicitor General’s directives do not preclude your families from obtaining supplemental materials for curricula your students are using, in any way. Now, you will simply need to ensure that supplemental materials are required or recommended by your curricula.”
Toma sent a letter to Horne today and said he did not believe the legislative record supported “such an overly restrictive or burdensome administration for the ESA program” and called the investigation “politically-motivated.”
The department declined to comment beyond their response to the Attorney General’s office.
Copyright © 2024 BridgeTower Media. All Rights Reserved.
Most Popular
Comments / 0