Report to the Legislature on the Implementation of the Special Education Reimbursement ("Circuit Breaker") Program (2008)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
provided further, the department shall conduct audits of fiscal year 2010 claims; provided further, that if the claims are found to be inaccurate, the department shall recalculate the fiscal year 2011 reimbursement amount and adjust the third and fourth quarter payments to the districts to reflect the new reimbursement amount; and provided further, that the department shall file a report with the house and senate committees on ways and means" School districts are eligible for reimbursements for students whose special education programs cost greater than four times the statewide per pupil foundation budget, which in FY10 totaled $38,636 (or 9,659 x 4).By law, districts are reimbursed for 75 percent of the costs above fourtimes statewide foundation, subject to appropriation.In FY10, 287 school districts submitted claims for over 11,800 students resulting in reimbursements in FY11 totaling over $128 million.The Department audited the claims submitted by sixty-one districts.The audit process resulted in a reduction of reimbursement from $24,708,476 to $24,418,980, or 1.2 percent.In addition, the analysis of common mistakes will be used to improve program documentation and training for local officials.Our goal for training is always to reduce the number of audit findings in subsequent years.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".