Of biggest servicers accountable for breaking the rules, because they were more or less too big to fail. This has to stop. Past Performance Matters if the Department Grants another massive new contract to a company with a track record of harmling students and members of the military, or if the company is facing state ag and federal lawsuit investigations, then i think thats a serious problem. I know that you want real reform. That means holding these student loan servicers accountable. I know the companies have a lot of lobbyists right here on capitol hill, but the families and the students dont, and they need you. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator warren. Senator isaacson. Thank you for your great work, and thank you for calling in advance and asking what i would ask you so ud a week to prepare. Im married to an i. D. E. A. Teacher, worked with special education for years, always had a quarter with the 1 cap, because i believe that the iep ought to be required for every student in american schools to determine the best plan given their abilities. What are you doing to help ensure kids are identified for i. D. E. A. And what are you doing to give us the flexibility to make sure the kid can be assessed for the best of their intellectual capability . This was one of the topics part of the negotiated rulemaking. Consensus was reached both on the structure for the requirements for the 1 cap, and also the waivers process for the 1 cap. That consensus reflects the principle that we believe all students with the right supports and accommodations can ultimately succeed, except there is an important need to Pay Attention to the needs of those with severe cog any activity disabilities who may be unable to achieve at the same level. The negotiators tried to strike the right balance in defining the cap and defining the requirements for the waiver. I was kind of yielding in favor with the child every single time. We need to make sure theyre getting the appropriate, and the arbitrary cap is not the right way. Secondly on what senator warren was asking, arent all Student Loans now direct loans from the government . There are Student Loans taken through private lenders, but within the direct loan program, we have tried to put in place repayment options that we think will aids, by allowing folks to cap the person of their income as so . And the Service Agents are agents for the government, are they not . The servicers do work for us under contract. Unfortunately i think hits turkeyly those have not built in all the protections that they should have. We intend to insure that they do that would be our fault, not the servicers fault . At the end of the day the servicers also have responsibility to not try to read the contract to find loopholes to provide less than adequate service. Rather than focus on where weve been, were focused on where were going forward. The point i want to get to is this one of the biggest things we need to do is teach or kids to be response in managing their own money and Student Loans are a good way for us to do that. The more we focus to teach them, and understand repayment is an obligation not just a promise, i think well do better off. On the 95 assessment thresholds, we gave a lot of flexibility to the systems. I gave them a lot of flexibility to allow students to you opt their children off a are you familiar with that . I am. And system may fall below 95 . Is that not correct . Both nclb and have a requirement that states would assess all students. As you know, it has a specific richt for state action when participate falls beloaned 95 . Thats a goal and the state has the responsibility. If the state tunnel meet that goal, to execute a plan to get to that point, correct . Yes. In our regulation being under the 95 participation, and ultimately getting to the all student participation thats required by the statute. Are you sure theres options or mandates . Including a state determined option. I think our intention now chairman alexander tried to get us to do. As in their state plan, that would be subject to peer review. I think its important to carry out the spirit of the law, and the spirit of that law was to irges you have no authority in the law to prescribe thats the job of congress. Thats something we need to talk about. None whatsoever. Just to be clear none whatsoever. We describe options and states choose but you do not have the authority to define what options states may choose. The state has the specific authority and flexibility under the law to do that. Just to be clear the state defines what they watch to do. Although we describe options, the state is determining the approach. Thank you. Senator franken. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to talk about something thats a particular interest to me making sure that foster kids can state in their cool when they change foster parents. A young lady ended up going to hamlin, very much, a very impressive young lady. She missed fourth grade entirely when she changed parents. Very often the only constant in their life is their school. What has been going on is the kids who have a favorite subject, a teacher, an activity in their school that is the biggest constant in their life, friends for goods in sake, suddenly changed foster parents and are forced to go to a different school. Everyone sort of agreed, finally, and we got this done. The way we wrong it in e. S. S. A. , is the School Direct and the public well fair agencies have to figure out how to pay for transportation. To get the school so in your proposed regulation, School Districts are ultimately providing transportation for foster since its the Comment Period on that regulation, id like to comment and ill rather you go with your guidance. The guidance doesnt specify who ultimately is respond responsible. Irwould like the agencies in the state to be working together on this. I want to eliminate any kind of barrier to this happening. This makes such a difference to these kids, and these kids deserve the to stay in their schools. Thats my comment. I appreciate that. We share the commitment to educational stability. We try to stay in the guidance, the agents and School Districts should be working together and we offer best practice, including around dispute resolution when there are different perspectives. It is true in the regulations we try to offer a path for how those disputes would ultimately be resolved, but yes, we are taking comment, and will consider all comment, including yours. Thank you. I want to talk about Something Else that i work for to get in this bill. Given that one in five your have or will have a serious mental illness, i firmly believe that Mental Health is one of our countrys pressing unmet needs. We have a long way to go. A we include provisions, thats why i was very disappointed that the spending bill that passed out of the Senate Appropriations committee did not ploy funding for enrichment grants, which includes my Machine Health provisions and other critical programs that americans really care about. Thats really something that parents care about, and the schools care about, and im hopeful that we can increase the funding once this bill comes to the floor. My question is what can the department of education do to support School Districts that are trying to expand Mental Health services at the local level. I have seen this work in School Districts that do this. Ive had roundtables with parents who say it has changed their family, it has changed their kids life. It has changed them. Yes, we share your disappointment with the proposed funding level for title iv. Certainly the president proposed a significant increase around title iv. 22 million of additional funding, because we would like to see more access to Mental Health illness among other limits that are addressed. We issued joint guidance with health and Human Services to help guide schools and districts, how to take advantage of the Affordable Care act to support schoolbased Mental Health, we think there are existing schoolbased Mental Health services. In that joint guidance. Also through our promise naked grant program, supporting efforts to match schools with communitybased organization and Community BasedHealth Providers to try to get those Mental Health services to kids and to families. On which times that has an impact on children as well. So i share your commitment, and would love to see the title 4b funding higher. I hope my colleagues share this commitment to Mental Health and schools so maybe we can get alternates more funding for that. Thank you, senator franken. Senator roberts. Well, thank you, mr. Chairman, as the distinguished chairman of the committee has said many times, the bill which we passed last year to reauthorize essa restores responsibility to states for their local schools by providing increased flexibility to design and implement snare education programs. Keyword here is local. Im glad too end the federal governments ability to use any tool to force states to adopt common core. If they want it fine, if they dont, thats the intent. In fact, just to be absolutely clear no officer or employee of the federal government including the secretary, shall attempt to influence, condition incentivize or coerce state adoption of the common core state standards, or any Order Academy standards common to a significant number of states or assessments tied to such standards. Heres the problem. A high ranks education leader in kansas recently pointed out to me and the fact he wants to be anonymous is rather telling, quote it is not in our opinion that the new essa law based on the current version of the proposed regulation is giving states flexibility around developing a rigorous and accountability model. It appears that once again, he said we can only build something as long as it meets a strict federal requirement. That certainly sounds like to me, at least, that the department of education is not following the spirit and intend of the every Student Succeeds act. As everyone is aware, e. S. S. A. Has countless prohibitions explicitly stating that the federal government is prohibit fred mandating directing, coe e coercing or exercising any supervisor standards that states develop or adopt. The admission is prohibited from influencing incentivizing or coercing states or School Districts to adopt any specific academy standards. Now, mr. Secretary, i would like specifically like to bring your on attention to section 1005b of the act which states that states shall provide an assurance that the state has adopted challenging academic content standards. Let me repeat that. A state had only provide an assurance that they have adopted academic standards. Turns to appropriate reg lace 29916, which addresses the state plan for requirements for challenging and assessments, this section would require each agency to provide evidence, evidence demonstrating that it has adopted changing academic comment on standards. My question whats the evidence for . Who is the judge . Where is it going . What federal involvement or requirement has now been reinstated regarding academic standards . This to me is an example of the department of education trying to influence state academic standards once again. It is also contrary to your commitment to me with respect to the intent, as well as the explicit prohibitions of the law during your nomination hearing. In my view, there is obviously a big difference between providing an assurance and providing evidence. This proposed regulation eadvice rates the intent of congress and e. S. S. A. Mr. Secretary, would please explaining what i think is a blatant violation that clearly says a state need only to provide an assurance they have adopted academic standards. Let me say the law is clear on that point. We are clear on that point. Ive been clear on that point, as said in our prior conversation. The law, ensure that states have an assessment system, and that is fair to students other states and experience on assessment who participate in the process to ensure that the state has gone through a rigorous and reliability process are matching their standards. As part of that process, that peer review process, which is under way. Who are these folks against . Were doing a twostep here, not a one step. To check the box and we are assuring you we are doing that. And probably in writing, so that they can understand what they are, but youre saying this is a secondary step that theyre going through with a whole bunch of other folks who have to stay we are providing evidence. I dont know what that means. Is it a lot of paperwork . What is it . And as part of that process, the peer reviewers who are the peer reviewers . They would include experts on assessment, who would participate what . The big 1 . What are we doing here . These are folks who work in other states and have word on assessments, who try to ensure that the assessments are fair and reflect the law, consistent with the law. What states are doing is providing evidence of a process by which they have aligned their assessments. But we said assurance. We didnt say this is two different things, and now youve got a peer review folks, perhaps theyre helpful, but again they could just check the bock with assurance as opposed to providing evidence to i dont know how much peer review but it seems we need further discussion on this. I appreciate your response. And we are hope to feedback on how to make absolutely clear that standards are set by states. Thats clearly a shared commitment. I think theres a peer review from my distinguished colleague in kansas perhaps that would not be received in open law and probably from kansas to massachusetts would be the same thing. I apologize for my colleague. Thank you, senator roberts. Senator bennett. Thank you very much for holding this. Thank you for your leadership. In colorado last week e. We came together and had an essa summit. Theres a lot of excite about being out from under the no child left behind and make sure we have the rigor. I know you yourself were a former principal of at school, i wonder if you can talk about what the department is doing to ensure that the voices and people working are being involved in essa implementation around the country . Thanks. Thats been a priority for us, and also a priority that we have communicated to states around their process. Weve had held over 200 meetings with educators, parents, community leaders, as we have worked to develop regulations and guidance, and received over 700 comments from individuals and comments from over 700 individuals and organizations. At the state level, we put out a Dear Colleague level, laying out recommendations and best practices. I think lots of states are doing a good job, so that they can participate. Some states have you to engage, so weve been on enquurgeing School Officers put out a guide to stakeholder organization. Aung weve had made clear its required. Certainly it is true that we have devolved the responsibility for implementation back to the states, and that in a fairly significant way. How do you expect over time well be able to identify those places where they are setting a rigorous standards for kids in places where its a less rigorous standard, and what do you expect the conversation to be like . On one of things the department is going to need to be vigilant about is the law provides a lot of flexibility in schools that are struggling or low Graduation Rates. And i agree with that president i think theres not any other reason for the federal government to not be involved in education. Could you talk about what the department is doing that that spirit is maintained and the commitment to equity that i think everybody shares we try throughout the accountability, to preserve the guardrails, making clear that and for all subgroups, not just at the summit level, but each of the indicators they have put in place that states need to have a clear process in place for identifies schools that have been consistently underperforming subgroups and meaningful intervention, that theres clear around equitable access to resources so we can ensure that schools are providing opportunities to our students of color, our lowincome students, our students with disabilities, but this work is going to require continued vigilance on the part of states and direct to make sure we dont let kids fall through the cracks. There are no federal models, as they were in child left behind, and i just wonder when youve thought that through a bit. About how people are going to have the research they need to implement targeted school xwroeismt strategies in this new world . Its very important that folks do that informed by evidence about what works. On certainly in efforts like the Education Innovation and research fund, the work of ies will help to provide that Evidence Base. We try in the regulations to talk about states, as they move progressively forward, if schools arent making progress, they need to rely on stronger evidence as they move through the levels of intervention, because we do have some good evidence around interventions that work. We know that in schools with struggling english learners, professional development for teachers working with english learners, using dual language strategy has a strong Evidence Base. We want to make sure folks are think being that as they plan their intervention. Thank you, mr. Secretary, thank you mr. Bennet. March chairman as i have listened to the debate at this hearing today, i am reminded of a provision that i wrote that was included this the dodd frank act that was known as the collins amendment. I had a longstanding battle with federal regulators on the implementation of that amendment, and finally the Banks Committee actu