May 23, 2016

Jim Malatras, Director of Operations

New York State Capitol
Albany, NY 12224
Dear Mr. Malatras:
On behalf of the students and parents in persistently strugglingschools that were deemed to no longer
fall under this designation, the Education Law Center (ELC) and the Alliance for Quality Education (AQE)
are writing to express our concern with the Administrations determination that these schools should now
forfeit funding allocated under the receivership statute, Education Law Section 211-f (2015), and the
accompanying Appropriations law. As we explain, this determination is in violation of both of these laws.
First, the Appropriations law required the Commissioner of Education to develop an Expenditure Plan for
the $75,000,000 two-year transformation grants for persistently struggling schools and required this
plan to be approved by the Division of Budget (DOB). The Expenditure Plan approved by the DOB
(attached) sets forth the terms of the $75M allocation and explicitly details the amount of funds to be
awarded to each of the schools through two-year grants. The Expenditure Plan firmly commits the State
to provide a full two-year allocation to the schools. The law provides no authority for the DOB to reverse
or alter the approval it has provided to these grant allocations.
The Expenditure Plan approved by the DOB clearly provides that these schools are entitled to the full twoyear grant allocation, detailing the specifc amount allocated to each school over this timeframe. i The
amounts set forth in the approved Expenditure Plan are the full two-year amounts. ii The Expenditure Plan
allows that a school may first apply for a planning grant equal to no more than 10% of the full two-year
amount and then apply for the remainder of the full two-year amount. iii Alternatively the Expenditure
Plan allows that the Superintendent at any time may apply for the full two-year allocation of the funds. iv
The Expenditure Plan further states that a school can choose to spend the full amount in either two years
or in one year. v These provisions demonstrate that each school is entitled to the full two-year allocation.
There is nothing in either the Expenditure Plan, Education Law 211-f, the accompanying Appropriations
legislation, the regulations promulgated pursuant to Education Law 211-f, 8 NYCRR 100.19, or the
guidance developed by the State Education Department (SED) that suggests a school would forfeit this
allocation once a school is no longer a persistently struggling school due to the increase in students test
scores.
Second, the Commissioner of Education acted in accordance with the requirements of the law in
determining that the schools in question were to be removed from the receivership list. Section 211-f
prescribes the circumstances under which a school is subject to receivership. In accordance with these
standards, the Commissioner had no choice but to remove these schools from the list because the test

scores in these schools rose to a level which meant they were no longer either struggling or persistently
struggling.
Further, the schools threatened with losing funds have exhibited improvement on state tests, which is
the same standard that originally placed them on the receivership list. The DOB should release the
allocated funding in compliance with both the law and the DOB-approved Expenditure Plan; withholding
these funds only jeopardizes the improvements being made in these schools and undercuts the path to
necessary further improvements.
Third, the removal of the schools from the persistently struggling designation does not release them
from their obligation to execute the School Comprehensive Education Plans that they were required to
develop in accordance with Section 211-f. The schools classified as persistently struggling developed
and implemented plans based upon two years of additional state funding committed under the law.
Pursuant to the Appropriations law, the state is obliged to continue to provide this funding through the
full two-year allocation timeframe. This funding is essential to achieve improvements in these schools in
accordance with the School Comprehensive Education Plans approved by the Commissioner of Education.
Finally, these schools are among the thousands in New York State suffering severe deficiencies in basic
educational resources as a result of the States persistent failure to live up to its constitutional duty to
fully fund Foundation Aid. The funds provided pursuant to the transformation grants, while inadequate
to compensate for the gaps in Foundation Aid, provide desperately needed resources to support student
success. Withholding funds will only exacerbate the resource deficiencies in these schools, impacting
those children in need of extra academic and social support.
Accordingly, we urge the Adminstration to discontinue the withholding of these funds, and to provide the
children in these schools the full allocation prescribed pursuant to the law and the Expenditure Plan
approved by the DOB.
Sincerely yours,

Wendy Lecker
Senior Staff Attorney
Education Law Center

Billy Easton
Executive Director
Alliance for Quality Education

Attachment: Persistently Struggling Schools/Transformation Grant Expenditure Plan

Expenditure Plan, p. 2
Expenditure Plan, p.3
iii
Expenditure Plan, p. 5
iv
Expenditure Plan, p. 5
v
Expenditure Plan, p. 5
i

ii