Transcript for 301: California's Historic $2 Billion Settlement: Addressing COVID Learning Loss

[music]

0:00:05.4 VB: Welcome to the Inclusive Education Project. I'm Vickie Brett.

0:00:10.1 AS: I'm Amanda Selogie. We're two civil rights lawyers on a mission to change the conversation about education, civil rights, and modern activism.

0:00:19.5 VB: Each week we're gonna explore new topics that are going to educate and empower others.

0:00:25.8 AS: And give them a platform to knock change in education and level the playing field.

0:00:35.1 VB: Welcome back listeners.

0:00:37.2 AS: We hope your February is going well. We know there's been quite a bit of crazy weather, whether it's storms or.

0:00:44.3 VB: Crazy weather is for Californians. Like that was [0:00:44.4] ____.

0:00:47.2 AS: Well, I know there's been a lot of like snow and like really, really cold like at the beginning of the month and like January and then like yeah, we had crazy rainstorms. So I just feel like, I mean, climate change is real and we are dealing with that.

0:01:00.3 VB: Oh, okay. You chose violence today. I see. Alright. Okay.

0:01:03.3 AS: I mean, we're dealing with weather that like we normally don't deal with, although I will say when we have these rainstorms and everyone is freaking out about our school's gonna be closed 'cause of the flooding. I remember El Nino, I remember as a kid having buckets in my classroom to have the rain go in it. We didn't get to leave school. We might have had 10 buckets collecting rain in our classroom. We were there.

0:01:26.3 VB: People have brought enough lawsuits, 'cause of lead poisoning and all this other stuff that will not happen to our kids or should not happen. It doesn't mean that it isn't happening. I'd like to hear from you if it is, 'cause that would be a very interesting access issue, but we digress. We actually have some good news. I mean, it is a historic settlement that came out at the beginning of February regarding recoupment of the loss.

0:01:55.7 AS: The learning loss from COVID.

0:01:58.0 VB: Children experienced through COVID. Yeah.

0:02:01.2 AS: This'll probably be the first of many I'm sure. And you know, we obviously are gonna touch base just briefly on this settlement in this case because there's a lot that's like to-do on their, to-do list. Like this isn't the end, it's the Cayla J. versus the state of California. And essentially public council brought it in conjunction with other organizations, primarily based on the learning loss that was suffered of children in California based on the COVID pandemic. And we want to just really quickly note that this is not a special education case. This was not a special education due process class action by any means. It was essentially a general education. So just keep in mind that as we like go forward, there's gonna be things that like, we'll talk about the distinction, why that's important.

0:02:49.6 VB: Absolutely. And I think also tied into it, it's a $2 billion settlement. Already, you know, breaking all sorts of numbers. And that's two with a B, 2 billion. And really it's like twofold, right? It's like, okay, like the pandemic brought this on. But the reasoning behind such a big number was also to, and this is from public counsel's, their senior special counsel for their strategic litigation was quoted saying like, "To really also erase opportunity gaps that existed pre-pandemic." So that would be for our black and brown kiddos. And so it's kind of doing two things, right? Like yes, really it was the pandemic, but we really wanna almost like get everybody up. I think they say all boats rise with the tide, right? So we just kind of wanted to go through it and talk about some of the concerns just as special education attorneys...

0:03:52.2 AS: And what this lawsuit demonstrates. So I mean it, it is one of the largest education-related settlements in US history. Like this is not some small feat by any means. So anything we will talk about in terms of our concerns has nothing to do with necessarily the settlement or the lawyers involved. It's where are we gonna go from here and how will people perceive this lawsuit? So essentially in the settlement, the $2 billion is not going directly to families. It is meant to propose new law and dedicate that $2 billion into funding to help students who fell behind essentially during the COVID pandemic specific, I mean mainly specifically looking at children who have faced lower educational outcomes, children with lower income families, and black and Latino communities.

0:04:41.2 AS: But it's also meant to help support evidence-based programs in schools to close these gaps. And you've heard us talk about evidence-based programs over and over because evidence-based programs are generally considered to be the best or more effective, appropriate for students who have IEPs. But also that they are effective and important for all students because they can provide...

0:05:05.7 VB: It always looks good on paper. We've said it a million times. An IEP can be perfect, but if the implementation falls short, then it's disastrous. And really the programs must serve students that have the data-driven process. Right? So they're looking at academic performance in math and English language parts. And so with that, we know that there are so many evidence-based programs out there. And I think when Amanda and I were kind of discussing it, which I should have pressed record when we were just having a pre-discussion about it, one of the main concerns that you had brought up was how you felt the public may perceive this, right?

0:05:47.2 AS: Yes. So, you know, my initial thought, this is historic, this is wonderful, this is great, this is needed. However, whenever there's a new law or guidelines that come out, there's always this perspective of just the overall community that we've solved a problem, that we've fixed it, that we're done, that we no longer need to worry about it. That if anything comes up in the future, why are we still allocating resources toward it? It's the general concept we get from people who are saying, why should we allocate special funds to kids with disabilities? What about all the other students? It's the same mentality. And I hope that most people who read the settlement or hear about it in the news don't have that perspective. But you know, the reality is, there's always that concern because of the fact that this was not geared specifically towards kids on IEPs.

0:06:39.0 AS: We do know that statistically the numbers of our minority black and brown low-income students on IEPs is a higher percentage. So certainly there is overlap there. The other concern is, okay, we're going to be requiring the legislature in California to propose certain new laws, legislation regarding how we're gonna recoup this learning loss and the evidence, you know, creating evidence-based programs and all of that. And there's some details in that that we'll go through in terms of like what needs to be in this law. But the other thing I really wanted... So we're concerned about is this legislation going to take into consideration these kids on IEPs. Because there's also a great need there.

0:07:23.0 AS: But I wanna make clear that this settlement is not necessarily bringing in new money. This $2 billion is supposed to be directed from existing learning, what's called the learning emergency block grant funds. So it's not like California is dipping deeper into their pockets, into taxpayer dollars, which may be a concern of other people of, "Oh my gosh, now we're gonna pay more taxes." It's this money is already there. But what this law is gonna require is that $2 billion of this block grant has to be used for this legislation.

0:08:01.4 VB: It's earmarking it so that it has a specific purpose, which I think helps most people. When you know that, okay, this is just for childcare, in your personal budgets, this is just for this. It really is able to kind of narrow down and really what, you know, there was a lot of community programs that helped out as well as like pro bono teams. And with the help of public counsel being the lead and one of those organizations is the Oakland REACH. And basically, they were saying it doesn't just stop here. And I think this is maybe where you were kind of going, Amanda is like, this isn't just like, yay we did it. Like no more. No more inequity. But REACH already has built-in solutions. They brought this lawsuit back in 2020 and or there and they have solutions.

0:08:58.4 VB: And so our big concern and takeaway is that we hope that legislators like go out. Like there are so many people that are already doing so many great things. Like we don't have to reinvent the wheel. And I feel like sometimes when we have a big win like this, it just fizzles out because we are not taking into consideration special education educators. We are not... Because any kid could have an IEP. Lace Robinson has opened our eyes to that. Any kid who has an Individualized Education Plan.

0:09:24.3 AS: And also.

0:09:27.3 VB: Experts are consulted.

0:09:28.8 AS: And then the second part of this is the settlement requires the proposal of legislation and there are some parts in the settlement that basically says that like neither party can support other legislation, neither party can like abridge or impact. Like you have to really support, and there's a lot of details in the settlement about like what needs to be in the legislation, but that's kind of where it lies. That once the legislation passes, and once those dollars are earmarked and allocated, where we go from there is not as clear because of course, LEAs are going to be required to fulfill the requirements of the legislation. There's gonna have to get the training, they're gonna have to do the needs assessment, they're gonna have to go through and provide this evidence-based curriculum and intervention. However, we already know that there are plenty of laws out there.

0:10:25.6 AS: I mean this is what we talk about every day, right? That the IDEA already outlines that specific intervention evidence-based is appropriate for students with special needs. So are we going to get more enforcement of this with these earmarked dollars? Is it gonna be that it's gonna be easier for LEAs to then purchase the evidence-based intervention software to use for every student and then it will impact and help? Or are school districts gonna see it as, well, we're already doing this, we don't have to change our ways? And who is enforcing whether or not they do it because we already deal with school districts not abiding by the law anyway. So we're hopeful, but we are cautious, we are cautiously optimistic, I guess, about this law, about this settlement. And we're excited to learn more about it as we get into the required legislation. And I mean, we've got some time before we see the effects of it. So, we'll be keeping you guys in the loop as we know more.

0:11:26.1 VB: Absolutely. And like I said at the top, it's one of those things where the high tide raises all the boats. So this by no means is a bad thing. But of course, we are attorneys, we go down the rabbit hole, especially with the line of work that we do. And we just wanna ensure that these children that we represent do have a seat at that table. And that they're not ignored as they have been so blatantly in the past. So we are just so grateful for public counsel. We're so grateful for you guys joining us. We will kind of give you some more information. And as we get more information, we will definitely let you know and we will talk.

0:12:04.9 AS: And if you're interested in reading the actual settlement or more information, DM us on Instagram, send us a message and we'll be happy to send you the links.

0:12:12.8 VB: Thanks guys. We'll talk to you later.

0:12:14.7 AS: Bye.

0:12:15.6 VB: Bye.

[music]