Standards, Teaching, Learning & Accountability
As a direct result of the Education Accountability Act of 1998 and the Federal No Child Left Behind Act there has been a major shift in education away from an emphasis on programs based model in education to a results driven accountability model. The budget proposals proposed within this document provide a basis for a shift in funding from a centralized top down methodology to education in South Carolina to much more flexible, locally controlled approach for resolving our states educational objectives while at the same time holding each of these districts and schools accountable for meeting the standards and goals required to effectively prepare our children for the future.
The realization that each school district is unique in its circumstances, geography and demographics requires that we rethink the concept that we can resolve our educational situation by using a large number of largely uncoordinated programs and money. A more realistic approach, especially in these difficult financial times is to shift funding from many of these programs and direct them more succinctly to base student costs.  This redirection of focus will serve to provide a better component of outcomes and enhancement in the education achievements of our children and the future of South Carolina. The education of our children is accomplished in the most effective manner one district at a time, one school at a time, one classroom at a time, and one child at a time.
			Student Learning
Advanced Placement (AP)- All secondary schools that enroll an adequate number of academically talented students to support the course must offer Advanced Placement classes.  The students in AP courses must take the national AP examinations, and students who score “3-5” on the AP exam may receive college credit for that subject area. (Proviso 1A.2; Education Improvement Act of 1984, Division II, Subdivision A, Subpart 4, § 1; SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-258.1)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cso/Advanced_Placement/ap.htm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Advance Placement	2,633,814		(119,549)		0		2,514,265		(119,549)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to increase the number of students scoring proficient and advanced on PACT.
Gifted & Talented - Gifted and talented students at the elementary and secondary levels must be provided programs during the regular school year or during summer school to develop their unique talents.  The education program must be beyond that normally provided by the general school program.  This item includes funding for artistically and academically talented students.  (Provisos 1A.3 & 1A.5, SC Code Ann § 59-29-170, 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-220)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cso/Gifted_Talented/gt.htm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Gifted and Talented	29,497,533		(1,338,893)		1,338,893		29,497,533		0
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to increase the number of students scoring proficient and advanced on PACT.
Handicapped Student Services - These services ensure that adequate educational services are provided to trainable and profoundly mentally disabled students in SC school districts.  (Proviso 1A.6, SC Code Ann. § 59-21-510 & § 59-33-10, 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-172)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Handicapped Student Services	4,105,017		(186,327)		186,327		4,105,017		0
Rationale: Restore special needs funding to support increased costs that fall upon school districts in supporting these children's needs.
Junior Scholars – Districts / Other Entities / Other Agencies - The program is designed to identify and recognize 8th graders with exceptionally high scholastic achievement and intellectual ability.  Summer academic “camps” are also offered for these students.  Funds are used to reimburse districts for administration of the PSAT to 8th graders.  Public (agencies) and private (entities) colleges and universities receive payment to help offset the cost of summer camp for rising 9th graders.   (Proviso 1A.7)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/ombudsman/getpage.cfm?id=1281
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Junior Scholars--District	51,558		(2,340)		2,340		51,558		0
Aid to Other Entities--Jr Scholars	29,908		(1,358)		(28,550)		0		(29,908)
Aid to Other Agencies-Jr Scholars	150,490		(6,831)		(143,659)		0		(150,490)
Rationale:  Maintain the district funding in order to support the PSAT by underprivileged students.  This will improve SAT scores by providing another opportunity to practice the SAT.  Similarly, the public and private colleges and universities in theis state should provide high achieving students their programs for recruiting on their campuses.  The objectives of these programs, while worthwhile, will likely continue to be implemented but not through state funding.
Tech Prep – Funds appropriated pursuant to the School-to-Work Transition Act of 1994.  South Carolina's Tech Prep initiative is administered through a sixteen-partnership consortia structure. The Tech Prep consortia was established and is aligned with the sixteen technical colleges in South Carolina to assist with the continuing education of those students who intend to obtain a degree from a Technical College.  (Proviso 1A.21)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cate/tech_prep/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Tech Prep	4,257,742		(193,259)		0		4,064,483		(193,259)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Alloc – EIA Other Entities – Professional development arts institutes approved by the State Department of Education for arts and regular classroom teachers.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Alloc EIA - Other Entities	475		0		(475)		0		(475)
Alloc -  EIA Other Agencies - Professional development arts institutes approved by the State Department of Education for arts and regular classroom teachers
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Alloc EIA - Other Agencies	15,642		0		(15,642)		0		(15,642)
Rationale:  There are alternate sources of professional development that should be used to continue this program. There are considerable state dollars spent on PD. ( 78 million ) and  the $38 million dollars for improving Teacher Quality that we generate from the Federal government that can be used for PD.
Modernize Vocational Equipment – Funds for the continuous upgrade of vocational equipment.  Each district receives a minimum of $20,000.  The remainder is allocated based student enrollment in technical education courses.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Modernize Vocational Equipment	4,151,978		(188,458)		0		3,963,520		(188,458)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Arts Curricula	1,597,584		(73,246)		0		1,524,338		(73,246)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Local School Innovation – Fifty percent (50%) of the funds are distributed based on average daily membership (attendance), and 50% on the EFA formula basis.  Funds are to be used for implementation of innovative programs designed to improve student learning, and accelerate performance.  Funds may be used to apply different teaching techniques, develop new approaches, re-define how schools operate and/or establishing appropriate relationships with other entities.  (Proviso 1A.29, SC Code Ann. § 59-139-05)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Local School Innovation	20,888,245		(948,117)		(1,140,707)		18,799,421		(2,088,824)
Rationale:  In a difficult financial year we recommend a 10% reduction in this line item with the realization that South Carolina receives $5.1 million from the Federal Government that goes to SDE to give grants to locals for Innovative Programs.
			Curriculum & Standards
Governor’s Institute of Reading - This program awards competitive grants to school districts for designing and providing a comprehensive approach to reading instruction based on best practices.  (Proviso 1A.42, SC Code Ann. § 59-5-135)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cso/GovernorReadingInst/govinstreading.htm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Governors Institute of Reading	1,312,874		(59,591)		(1,253,283)		0		(1,312,874)
Rationale:  This duplicates the Federal Reading grant that we receive from NCLB - $15 million per year. While reading programs are always needed, these grants should include an evaluation component so that South Carolina can properly evaluate the effectiveness of these programs.
Teacher Grants – Competitive grants for teachers awarded for the purpose of improving teaching practices and procedures.  Grants may not exceed $2,000 per teacher or $6,000 per grant unit.  (SC Education Improvement Act of 1984, Division II, Subdivision C, Subpart 4, § 3; 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-201.1)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cso/eia/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Grants	1,348,241		(61,197)		(1,287,044)		0		(1,348,241)
Rationale:  This program serves a very small population and the program has not provided a data base of improved teaching practices and procedures that all teachers can implement, the recommendation is that this program no longer be funded and these funds be diverted to the base student cost.
			Assistance, Intervention & Reward
Homework Centers - Schools and districts designated as below average and unsatisfactory must establish Homework Centers for students needing special or more attention than is afforded them during regular school hours.  Schools receiving such designations must provide centers that go beyond the regular school hours.  (SC Code Ann. § 59-18-1910)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/ssys/youth_services/homework/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Homework Centers - EAA	2,067,936		(93,864)		0		1,974,072		(93,864)
Rationale:  21st Century Learning grants from the federal government also fund these centers ($7,911.716).  These centers  MUST be more than daycare after school and there should be a strong evaluation requirement tied to them in terms of student learning.  The SDE should monitor all programs to insure that they are geared to improving.  Achievement must be tied to academic standards.  The PURPOSE must be for academic improvement.  Title I money-basic grants to qualifying schools $164,700,381) could also be used.
Teacher & Principal Specialists – External Review Teams may recommend that Teacher and / or Principal Specialists be assigned to low performing school.  Teacher specialists are eligible for a salary supplement equal to 50% of the average teacher’s salary.  Principal specialist salary supplements are 125% of the supplement amount for teachers.  (Provisos 1A.40 & 1A.45, SC Code Ann. § 59-18-1530)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/sq/ci/tsos/home.htm
South Carolina has not been able to hire the total number of teacher Specialists that the EAA requires. This program is being reviewed by the EOC and has not been evaluated from a cost benefit analysis.  We would fund this at the current mid year adjustment level until other options are considered and a complete evaluation of the program is complete. Funding must be tied to results.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher/Principal Specialist - EAA	13,199,637		(599,132)		0		12,600,505		(599,132)
External Review Teams - Schools receiving a rating of unsatisfactory must have an external review team to examine school and district educational programs, actions and activities.  Schools rated below average may also request an External Review Team.  These teams provide recommendations for improvement.  Funds are also used for the placement of on-site assistance personnel (curriculum specialist, etc.) based upon a tiered system of assistance.  (Proviso 1A.47)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
External Review Teams	4,000,000		(181,560)		(3,818,440)		-		(4,000,000)
Rationale:  This recommendation is consistent with the Education Oversight Committee’s recommendation to fund external review teams.
Retraining Grants - A grant program for schools designated as below average or unsatisfactory.  Funds are to be used for professional development as outlined in the school renewal program.  One of the primary uses is for retraining of school faculty and administration.  Allowable costs include costs for consultants, conference registration, travel, tuition and fees for courses taken by staff, supplies and materials (associated with professional development), and substitute teachers pay (so as to allow regular teachers to attend training).  (Proviso 1A.50, SC Code Ann. § 59-18-1560)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Retraining Grants	4,628,645		(210,094)	-	(1,595,051)	-	2,823,500	-	(1,805,145)
Rationale:  We are recommending that this be reduced by an additional $1.59 million in view of the fact that the state is receiving $38,000,000 from the Federal government.
Report Cards – funds used for the compilation of data, printing and preparation of the annual report card for each school showing absolute and improvement ratings.  (Proviso 1A.46)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Report Cards	1,018,000		(46,207)	-	-	-	971,793	-	(46,207)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Assessment – Funds are used for implementation of the of the assessment instruments in accordance with Education Accountability Act requirements.  Testing includes the Palmetto Achievement Challenge Test (PACT), the readiness assessment test and the exit examination.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Assessment (SDE Other Operating)	1,000,559		-	-	-	-	1,000,559	-	-
Rationale:  Recommend that we maintain the previous years budgeted amount in view of the federal funds that have been allocated for testing under NCLB. The federal government  gives $6 million plus.  The federal government they also received $2.3 million to give an English proficiency test to help schools develop academic plans for children.
Palmetto Gold & Silver Awards – Monetary awards given to those schools achieving at least above a “Good” absolute or improvement rating.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Palmetto Gold/Silver Awards	1,000,000		(45,390)	-	45,390	-	1,000,000	-	-
Rationale:  The programs are important to those schools and students that continue to excel. It is important to note that the federal government gives us reserved funds for awards and incentives to teachers or schools (TitleI) These funds should not duplicate Title I awards.
Aid to Other Agencies – Funds used to reimburse Clemson University for a portion of the cost for teacher training associated with the Reading Recovery program
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Aid Other State Agencies	4,628,645		(210,094)		(1,595,051)		2,823,500		(1,805,145)
South Carolina has received a Federal reading grant that provides administrative fund that can be used to fund the administrative costs of this program through the NCLB Act.
Act 135 – Academic Assistance – This program requires districts to implement strategies to provide needed and targeted assistance to students experiencing difficulties in kindergarten through grade 12.  School select appropriate strategies based on needs assessments conducted as part of the district and school comprehensive planning.  Funds are also used to provide reading recovery to improve reading skill in the early grades.  Students eligible for free and reduced-price lunches is a major component in determining allocations.  (Provisos 1A.9-1A.13, SC Code Ann. § 59-139-05, 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-267 & 43-268)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Act 135 - Academic Assistance	120,412,397		(5,464,683)	-	-	-	114,947,714	-	(5,464,683)
Rationale:  Recommend that we maintain last year’s reduction in view of the fact that there is additional federal funding for academic assistance.
			Early Childhood Education
Four-Year Old Early Childhood – The initiative targets four-year olds who have tested “Not Ready” and whose parents voluntarily allow participation.  Students eligible for free and reduced-price lunches is a major component in determining allocations.  (Proviso 1A.14, SC Code Ann. § 59-5-65 & § 59-135-05, Target 2000:  School Reform for the Next Decade Act, 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-264.1)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Four Year Old Early Childhood	22,870,783		(1,038,105)	-	-	-	21,832,678	-	(1,038,105)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Bus Driver Salary – Funds to school districts to assist with Bus Driver’s salaries.  Allocation based on time it takes for drivers to complete their routes.  (SC Code Ann. § 59-65-10)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Bus Driver Salary	472,210		(21,434)	-	-	-	450,776	-	(21,434)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Parenting Support / Family Literacy – Initiatives designed to support parents in their role as principal teachers of their children.  Initiatives include parent education and family literacy for those parents with school age children 5 years of age or younger.  (Provisos 1A.27 & 1A.28, Early Childhood Development and Academic Assistance Act of 1993, SC Code Ann § 59-1-450 & § 59-139-05, 24 SC Ann Regs. 43-265)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Parent Support	4,354,304		(197,642)	-	-	-	4,156,662	-	(197,642)
Family Literacy	1,779,642	-	(80,778)	-	-	-	1,698,864	-	(80,778)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
			Teacher Quality
			Retention & Reward
Teacher of the Year Award – Monetary awards including $25,000 for the Teacher of the Year; $10,000 for each of the four (4) Honor Roll Teachers, and $1,000 for the teacher of the year for each district, one at the Department of Juvenile Justice, and one at Department of Corrections.  (Proviso 1A.38)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher of the Year Award	174,000		(7,898)	-	-	-	166,102	-	(7,898)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Teacher Quality Commission - Funding for the Commission on Teacher Quality is used to implement the recommendations of the Commission. In order to oversee the implementation of the Commission on Teacher Quality’s recommendations (which became statute), the State Superintendent of Education created the Division of Teacher Quality at the State Department of Education in July 2000.  The Teacher Quality Act of 2000 contains over 25 initiatives that are the responsibility of the Division of Teacher Quality.  Since the funding was initially approved, the state has been given additional accountability responsibilities by the federal government.  Specifically, the state is required to produce and widely disseminate a report card on the teacher education programs with no funding from the federal government.  In addition, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, No Child Left Behind) requires the state to monitor the school districts implementation of teacher quality goals and their progress in attaining those goals.  Both of these accountability measures require personnel time and resources to accomplish these tasks.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Quality Commission	569,679		(25,858)	-	(543,821)	-	-	-	(569,679)
Rational:  Reduce this funding and shift funds to school districts in view of the fact that South Carolina now receives $38 million for Improving Teacher Quality - that can be used for these purposes.
Teacher Salary Supplement (& Fringe) – One of the state’s statutory objectives is maintain the average teacher’s salary at or above the Southeastern Average.  Education Improvement Act funds are used to supplement State and Local schools districts funds in order to assist in achieving that objective
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Salary Supplement	204,594,180		-	-	-	-	204,594,180	-	-
Teacher Salary Supplement - Fringe	37,849,923		-		-		37,849,923		-
Rationale:  Funding for teacher salaries and fringe benefits is maintained at the current year’s level to ensure that school districts have adequate funds to hire and retain quality teachers while maintaining teacher salaries at $300 above the southeastern average teacher salary.
Critical Teaching Needs - This program provides funding for the purpose of improving mathematics, science, reading, and computer instruction at the elementary, middle, and secondary levels. Funds may be also be used for teacher training courses that support the education of students with disabilities or special needs in the regular classroom, and instructional techniques and strategies in keeping with the professional development plans. School districts or a consortium of districts may conduct courses for certificate renewal or may contract with colleges to offer the prescribed courses.  (Proviso 1A.17, SC Code Ann. § 59-5-60, 24 SC Code Ann. Regs. 43-500)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/superintendent/policy/CriticalTeachingNeedsGrants.htm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Critical Teaching Needs	602,911		-		-		602,911		-
Teacher Supplies – Teachers are reimbursed $200 each for classroom supplies and materials.  (Proviso 1A.36)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Supplies	10,000,000		(481,266)		-		9,518,734		(481,266)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
			Professional Development
Professional Development - The funds shall be used for professional development for teachers in grades kindergarten through twelve in the academic standards (in the areas of English/language arts, mathematics, social studies, science, visual and performing arts, foreign language, physical education, and health) to better link instruction and lesson plans to the standards, develop classroom assessments consistent with the standards and PACT-style testing, and analyze PACT results for needed modifications in instructional strategies. Teachers participating in this professional development shall receive credit toward recertification according to State Board of Education guidelines. Funds provided for professional development on standards may be carried forward into the current fiscal year to be expended for this same purpose. Funds are used to increase teacher knowledge of subject-matter content in English/language arts, mathematics, social studies, and science; increase teacher knowledge of and practice in standards-based instructional strategies that promote the academic achievement of all children; increase teacher skills in developing classroom assessments and teacher skills in using assessment data to improve instructional practice; and support evaluation strategies
designed to demonstrate that these funds attribute to the increased knowledge and skills of participating teachers, the improvement of student achievement, and the closing of academic performance gaps that exist among student subgroups.  (Provisos 1A.34 & 1A.44)  http://www.sde.state.sc.us/offices/cso/pdsi/default.cfm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Professional Development - EAA	6,646,260		(442,200)		(6,204,060)		-		(6,646,260)
Rationale:  In its initial recommendation the EIA Improvement and Mechanisms Subcommittee recommended no EIA funding for professional development because the EAA does not require professional development funds.  School districts currently have access to professional development funds through local revenues, Title I federal funds, and individual EIA programs, such as, the Gifted and Talented Program.  School officials have argued that they have an overabundance of professional development monies.  And, because not all of these EIA professional funds were being allocated directly to school districts, the redirection of these funds from professional development to the base student cost will not adversely impact the professional development opportunities for our state’s teachers.
Professional Development NSF Grant – Funds distributed to the thirteen math & science hubs around the state.  Funds are used to support efforts to improve math and science in accordance with the Statewide Systemic Initiative (SSI) strategic plan.  The program places strong emphasis on expanding the use of computers in the classroom.  The hubs provided over 150,000 hours of professional development training, including 180 training sessions last fiscal year.  (Proviso 1A.31)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Professional Development NSF Grant	3,038,290		(137,908)		-		2,900,382		(137,908)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
			Leadership
Principal Executive Institute – A three-year executive training program for principals and superintendents designed to orient and educate these individuals with the various aspects of the requirements associated with the position.  The program stresses such topics as the law, policies, procedures, and the importance of networking, conflict management, effective planning, and instructional program development.  The principal Induction program provides training, coaching and support for first-time principals during their first year on the job.  The principal assessment center requires all first-time principal to undergo an intensive, structured assessment of leadership and management skills prior to their permanent appointment. (Proviso 1A.37)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Principal Executive Institute - EAA	949,466		(43,096)		-		906,370		(43,096)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Principal Salary Supplement – Salary supplement used to help attract and retain principals and assistant principals.  Funds are distributed to school districts based on their average daily membership.  Within each school district, the funds are distributed equally among principals and assistant principals.  (Proviso 1A.22)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Principal Salary Supplement	3,095,968		-		-		3,095,968		-
			State
EOC Public Relations Initiative - The Education Accountability Act requires the Education Oversight Committee (EOC) to conduct an “on-going public information campaign” to apprise the public of the status of the public schools and the importance of high standards for academic performance.  Section 59-28-190 of the Parental Involvement in Their Children’s Education Act also requires the public awareness campaign to promote the importance of parental involvement.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
EOC Public Relations Initiative - EAA	237,366		(10,774)		-		226,592		(10,774)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
			Other
State Agency Teacher Pay – BCB – Funds per Proviso 1A.20 of the current Act.  These funds are the same as Teacher Salary Supplement funds for the school districts, but these funds go to the special schools (Wil Lou Gray, Gov Schools, Deaf & Blind, etc.) for their classroom teachers.  Funds are used to supplement classroom teacher’s salaries.  The Budget and Control Board distributes the additional amount appropriated each year, which appears on the line in question.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
State Agency Teacher Pay-B&CB	725,178		-		819,576		1,544,754		819,576
Rationale:  The difference in funding between the EOC recommendation and this budget is due to the recommendation that the John De La Howe School be closed.
Special Schools – Teacher Salary Supplement – Governor’s School for Arts & Humanities, Wil Lou Gray, School for the Deaf & Blind, Department of Disabilities & Special Needs, John De La Howe, Clemson Ag. Ed. Teachers, and the Governor’s School for Science & Math.  These schools receive teacher salary supplement funds for their classroom teachers, as do the regular public regular schools.  (Proviso 1A.20)
Special Schools	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Governor's School for Arts and Humanities	45,177		-		-		45,177		-
Wil Lou Gray	447,033		-		-		447,033		-
SC School for the Deaf and Blind	3,962,831		-		-		3,962,831		-
Dept. of Disabilities & Special Needs	763,653		-		-		763,653		-
John De La Howe	320,550		-		(320,550)		-		(320,550)
Clemson Agriculture Education Teachers	162,195		-		-		162,195		-
Governor's School for Science and Math	122,694		-		-		122,694		-
Rationale:  The difference in funding between the EOC recommendation and this budget is due to the recommendation that the John De La Howe School be closed.
Writing Improvement Network (WIN) - The Writing Improvement Network is a special project created, coordinated, and administered by teachers involved with the South Carolina Writing Project, an affiliate of the National Writing Project.  WIN is a professional development initiative designed to assist in providing training in the implementation of current, research-based best practices in teaching students how to be better writers.  WIN also assists in choosing and organizing staff development and classroom resources through teacher experts.  http://www.winsc.org/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Writing Improvement Network-USC	302,158		(13,714)		(288,444)		-		(302,158)
Rationale:  Eliminate funding for this program.  These are support activities housed in universities.  If school districts decide to utilize these services-they can contract these services OR they could pay a subscription fee.  Not all districts use these services nor feel they are that effective.
Education Oversight Committee – The Education Oversight Committee receives no General Fund appropriations.  The Committee and its staff are funded with EIA funds to include other operating expenses (supplies, material, etc.)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Education Oversight Committee	1,062,774		(48,236)		-		1,014,538		(48,236)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
Geographic Alliance - A partnership between the National Geographic Society and the State Geographic alliance to act as a resource center for K-12 teachers seeking to improve geography and social studies instruction.  The Alliance is located at the USC Department of Geography.  Approximately 70% of the funds are used for personal service.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
SC Geographic Alliance-USC	188,631		(8,561)		(180,070)		-		(188,631)
Rationale:  Eliminate funding for this program.  These are support activities housed in universities.  If school districts decide to utilize these services, they can contract these services OR they could pay a subscription fee.  Not all districts use these services, nor feel they are that effective.
School Improvement Council (SIC) – See proviso 1A.51.  The Council was created to provide training and services to local School Improvement Councils statewide in support of their work to improve public education in each community. Located at the University of South Carolina College of Education in Columbia, the SIC fulfills its mission by providing a wide range of workshops and training programs at the state, regional, district and school levels for council members and related school personnel. A variety of support services are available at no cost to SICs including a newsletter sent regularly to all SIC members. Videos, printed materials, and technical assistance are also available.  (Proviso 1A.51)  http://www.ed.sc.edu/sic/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
School Improvement Council	188,759		(8,567)		(180,192)		-		(188,759)
Rationale:  Eliminate funding for this program.  These are support activities housed in universities.  If school districts want to use their services, they can contract these services OR they could pay a subscription fee.  Not all districts use these services nor feel they are that effective.
Centers of Excellence – The EIA provides for the establishment of a contract program administered by the Commission on Higher Education to foster the development of Centers of Excellence in teacher training in public and private colleges and universities.  These resource centers are designed to improve teacher education programs in specific priority areas.  http://rpsec.usca.sc.edu/CentersOfExc/
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Centers of Excellence-CHE	500,226		(22,704)		185,431		662,953		162,727
Rationale:  This increase is based upon the EOC recommendation to provide centers of excellence in colleges and universities that will specifically focus on preparing teachers to teach in under-performing schools.  This increase is needed to produce quality teachers
Teacher Recruitment Program - The Teacher Recruitment (Fellows) program provides scholarships to 200 high school seniors each year who have a desire to obtain a teaching degree.  Scholarships are $6,000 annually (including $300 for books).  The program became fully funded in FY 03-04 with the last cohort of 200 students being funded.  The program was designed to provide scholarships to up to 800 students annually (a cohort of 200 new students enrolled in a four year teaching program).         The program is funded at $6,113,578, which supports four other programs including Pro Team, Teacher Cadet, Teacher Forum and National Board Support.  Each of these programs is designed to attract and recruit students into teaching.  Of the $6.1 million, $467,000 is transferred to S.C. State University for minority recruitment efforts (see proviso (1A.24).  The Teaching Fellows program is by far the biggest in terms of funding.  The balance of the budget is personal service and other operating  (Proviso 1A.24)
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Recruitment Program-CHE	6,113,587		(277,477)		-		5,836,110		(277,477)
Rationale:  It was the recommendation of the EOC to make permanent the mid-year reductions.  This spring the first cohort of 200 Teaching Fellows will graduate.  It is imperative that the hiring and placement of these students in our public schools be closely monitored.  These students need to be certified in areas of critical need, such as special education, math and science.  Will these students who are some of the brightest minds in our state chose to teach in under-performing schools? These issues will need to be addressed and evaluated if the program provides the state with a positive return for its money.
Teacher Loan Program - This loan program was established to entice talented and qualified students into the teaching profession. Freshmen and sophomores can borrow up to $2,500 per year while juniors, seniors and graduate students can get up to $5,000 per year. These loans are cancelled by teaching in a state public school in an area of critical need (either geographic or subject area).  The loan is cancelled at rate of 20% a year (or 33% a year if teaching in both a geographic AND subject need area).  The loan has to be repaid if the student does not go into a critical need area.  Repayments to the corp. are used to fund the program.  Approximately 1,500 students receive loans under this program annually.  http://www.slc.sc.edu/parentstuds/wp154.htm
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
Teacher Loan Program-State Treasurer	2,863,826		(129,980)		129,980		2,863,826		-
Rationale:  This recommendation funds the program at the current appropriation level.
EOC Family Involvement – In accordance with the Parental Involvement in their Children’s Education Act the EOC is involved in (1) the development and distribution of curriculum standards to parents; (2) determining the effectiveness of the parental involvement programs; and (3) recognizing employers who implement policies and programs that encourage parental involvement.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
EOC  Family Involvement	47,473		(2,155)		-		45,318		(2,155)
Rationale:  Recommendation of the EOC	to make permanent the mid-year reductions.
			SDE Request and /or EOC Recommendation
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
SDE Administration	10,596,492		(526,353)		(533,296)		9,536,843		(1,059,649)
Rationale:  The SDE administrative costs need to be reduced in these difficult financial times and these funds need to be shifted to the classrooms.
			Proposed New Programs
High Schools that Work  - The program’s goal is to increase the number of students who meet reading, math and science performance goals and who complete an upgraded academic core and a career focus.  The ten key practices and key conditions of High Schools That Work include: advocating accelerated learning and raising standards for all students, giving students the counseling, support, and extra help they need to plan and complete a challenging program of study, involving parents and the community in efforts to raise student achievement, and securing and effectively utilizing world class technology.  The key practices relate directly to the No Child Left Behind Act requirements of assessment and accountability for results, flexibility and local control, and scientifically based research.  All requested funds will flow-through to school districts and career centers.
	FY 2003-04 Per Appropriation Act		FY 03-04 Cuts		Governor's Adjustments		TOTAL		Difference
High Schools That Work	-		-		500,000		500,000		500,000
Rationale:  Both the Education Oversight Committee and the Department of Education recommends fully funding 50 High Schools that Work sites in South Carolina.  This initiative which combines challenging academic courses and modern career/technology studies to improve student achievement has proven effective with empirical research.  This program is one approach in improving the number of students graduating from our schools with both the academic and work force readiness skills needed to succeed.
Data Collection	-		-	-	2,000,000	-	2,000,000	-	2,000,000
Student Identifier	-		-	-	488,000	-	488,000	-	488,000
Rationale:  SC has lacked the ability to make important data-based decisions regarding the effectiveness of specific education programs and initiatives.  Funding of the unique student identifier and completing the data collection warehouse will ensure that teachers, administrators, parents, and policymakers will have the tools necessary to make hard decisions about educational funding and priorities.  Funding for these programs need to be appropriated to the EOC to provide oversight of the research, outsourcing and implementation of this program. This funding is also needed to satisfy the data and reporting requirement of the EAA and No Child Left Behind. It is recommended that a student confidentiality policy be developed and implemented to protect the privacy of the students and families.