Trump-fake-news-yellow-bg-950x108px.jpg

Digital Teaching and Learning Program Exposed

From ALEC Exposed
Jump to: navigation, search

The Digital Teaching and Learning Program (Utah SB 222) is a bill that was passed by the Utah State Senate on March 9, 2015, passed by the Utah State House of Representatives on March 12, 2015, signed into law by Governor Gary Herbert on March 31, 2015. At the 2015 States and Nation Policy Summit ALEC will be presenting the Digital Teaching and Learning Act, a bill that is based on this piece of legislation.

CMD's Bill Summary

This bill prescribes a $75,000,000 funding scheme for technology in schools that would siphon funds for public schools and mandate those funds be used for technology in both public and private charter schools. In Utah, educators were concerned about how this legislation cut into an already tight public education budget.

Bill Text

Summary

This bill creates the Digital Teaching and Learning Program for public schools, a qualifying grant program for local education agencies (LEA), to improve student outcomes through the use of digital teaching and learning technology and educator professional development.

Legislation

Section 1.{Definitions}

(A) “Advisory committee” means the Digital Teaching and Learning Advisory Committee.

(B) “Board” means the State Board of Education {Utah}.

(C) “Core subject areas” means the following subject areas:

(1) English language arts;
(2) Mathematics;
(3) Science; and
(4) Social studies.

(D) “Education consultant” means the person selected by the UETN board.

(E) “Education technology provider” means a person selected by the UETNboard.

(F) “Educator” means an individual who holds or is required to hold a license, under Title 52A, Chapter 6, Educator Licensing and Professional Practices Act.

(G) “High quality professional learning” means a comprehensive, sustained, and intensive approach to improving educator effectiveness in raising student achievement and improving the school level outcomes that meet the professional learning standards described below.

(H) “Independent evaluator” means the person selected by the board.

(I) “LEA plan” means an LEA’s plan to implement the program.

(J) “Local education agency” or “LEA” means:

(1) A school district;
(2) A charter school; or
(3) The {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind.

(K) “Master plan” means the master plan developed by the UETN board, with final approval of the board.

(L) “Program” means the Digital Teaching and Learning Program described in this part.

(M)“Qualifying LEA” means an LEA identified by the UETN board as eligible to receive a grant through the program.

(N) “Statewide assessment” means a criterion-referenced test of student achievement in English language arts, mathematics, or science, including a test administered in a computer adaptive format, which is administered statewide under Part 6, Achievement Tests {Utah}.

(O) “{Utah} Education and Telehealth Network” or “UETN” means the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network created in Section 53B-17-105.

Section 2. {Digital Teaching and Learning Program}

(A) There is created the Digital Teaching and Learning Program, a qualifying grant program for qualifying LEAs, to improve student outcomes through the use of digital teaching and learning technology and educator professional development.

Section 3. {Digital Teaching and Learning Program Advisory Committee}

(A) There is created the Digital Teaching and Learning Program Advisory Committee to:

(1) Assist the UETN board with developing selection criteria for and selecting the education consultant described in Section 4; and
(2) Provide input on the development of the master plan described in Section 5.

(B) The advisory committee shall consist of:

(1) The following members appointed by the UETN board:
(a) One member who has extensive digital educational content experience related to curriculum and learning standards;
(b) One member who is:
(i) An assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction; or
(ii) A principal who has extensive experience with a technology program;
(c) One member who has extensive experience with mobile device and connectivity infrastructure;
(d) One member with demonstrated change leadership or change management expertise;
(e) One member who is a teacher recognized as a leader in implementing a technology program;
(f) One member who has extensive experience in independent program evaluation of technology initiatives;
(g) One member who has extensive experience and demonstrated leadership in college and career readiness;
(h) One member who represents business with expertise in the state requirements for a skilled workforce;
(i) One member who is a technology expert from an urban LEA;
(j) One member who is a technology expert from a rural LEA:
(k) One member of the Senate; and
(l) One member of the House of Representatives;
(m) The executive director of the UETN; and
(n) The state superintendent of public instruction.

(C) The UETN board shall weigh heavily an individual’s reputation as a national leader in the individual’s area of expertise when appointing the members described in Subsections (B)(1)(a)(d)(e)(g)(h).

(D) When a vacancy occurs in the membership of the advisory committee appointedunder Subsection

(B)

(1), for any reason, the UETN board shall appoint a replacement member who meets the same criteria as the vacated member.

(E) The executive director of UETN and the state superintendent of public instruction shall serve as co- chairs for the advisory committee.

(F) The advisory committee shall meet when a meeting of the advisory committee is called by an advisory committee chair.

(G)

(1) A quorum of the advisory committee is eight members
(2) Approval by the greater of the following is required to constitute an action of the advisory committee:
(a) A majority of the members present at an advisory committee meeting; or
(b) Seven members.

(H) A member may not receive compensation or benefits for the member’s service but may receive per diem and travel expenses in accordance with:

(1) Section 63A-3-106;
(2) Section 63A-3-107; and
(3) Rules made by the Division of Finance pursuant to Sections 63A-3-106 and 63A-3-107.

(I) UETN staff shall staff the advisory committee.

Section 4. {Education consultant – Education technology providers – Monitoring student usage of technology}

(A)

(1) On or before June 30, 2015, in consultation with the board and the advisory committee,the UETN board shall select, through a request for proposals process, a single education consultant with integrated whole-school learning and teaching technology deployment experience.
(2) The education consultant shall advise the board, the UETN board, and the advisory committee as provided in this part, including consulting with the board, the UETN board, and the advisory committee in:
(a) The development of the master plan under Section 5;
(b) The selection of education technology providers under Subsection (B);
(c) The development of LEA plans; and
(d) The review and approval of LEA plans under Section 6.
(3) The education consultant may not be selected as an education technology provider or assist any person in responding to a request for proposals described in Subsection(B).

(B)

(1) In consultation with the board and the education consultant, the UETN board shall, through a pre-qualification process described in Section 63G 6a-403, identify pre-qualified education technology providers that a qualifying LEA may select to work with to implement the program by providing the following goods or services:
(a) Wireless network infrastructure or infrastructure related to digital teaching and learning;
(b) Hardware related to digital teaching and learning, including laptop computers or mobile devices;
(c) Digital licensed and unlicensed content, resources, and programs to accelerate student learning in mobile digital teaching and learning;
(d) Software that provides a digital learning platform that:
(i) Is modular and integrated via an open standards architecture;
(ii) Provides a classroom, school, and system-wide digital assessment system that tracks student progress against the state standards of learning established by the board;
(iii) Includes comprehensive digital curriculum mapping, assessment, and performance data aggregation and related reporting that is accessible to students, teachers, administrators, and parents;
(iv) Includes collaboration and communication tools and integration via applicable interoperability standards; and
(v) Is capable of integrating with the state’s or LEA’s student information system;
(e) Technology support services; or
(f) Professional learning for educators, administrators, and support staff related to the program.
(2) A person who responds to the request for a statement of qualifications under the prequalification process described in Subsection (B)(1) shall submit:
(a) A list of products and services the person can provide as an education technology provider;
(b) A proposal on how the person’s products or services meet:
(i) The criteria described in Subsection (B)(1); and
(ii) The goals and criteria of the state’s master plan described in Section 5; and
(c) A disclosure of all exclusive financial arrangements with education publishers, other education technology providers, or education companies.

(C) In evaluating a statement of qualifications under the prequalification process described in Subsection (B)(1), the UETN board’s evaluation criteria shall weigh heavily the person’s ability to prepare and customize the person’s products or services to meet the objectives of a participating LEA’s LEA plan.

(D) In prequalifying the education technology providers under Subsection (B), the UETN board shall prequalify education technology providers that allow an LEA to:

(1) Select an education technology provider to assist in the development and implementation of an LEA plan under Section 53A-1-1209; or
(2) Select specific products or services provided by one or more education technology providers.

(E) After identifying prequalified education technology providers as described in Subsection (B), the UETN board shall follow the request for proposals process described in Title 63G, Chapter 6a, {Utah} procurement Code {Utah}, to select education technology providers from the prequalified education technology providers identified in Subsection (B).

(F) The UETN board shall ensure that:

(1) A contract with an education technology provider selected under this section will include a performance accountability section; and
(2) The performance accountability section described in Subsection (F)(1) defines:
(a) Penalties or consequences, if the qualifying LEA, using the services of the education technology provider selected under this section, does not meet student performance outcome benchmarks described in Subsection 53A-1-1208(6); and
(b) Requirements that a qualifying LEA shall meet for the education technology provider selected under this section to receive compensation.

(G) Annually, within 30 days of the publication of results on a statewide assessment, the UETN board shall publish a report detailing the correlation of the use of each education technology provider’s products and services selected under this section and the student academic achievement, as measure by the student results on a statewide assessment.

(H)

(1) The UETN board shall select, through a request for proposals process, one or more education technology providers to provide licenses for software that monitors student usage of technology in qualifying LEA schools.
(2) In evaluating education technology provider proposals submitted in response to the request for proposals described in Subsection (H)(1), the UETN board shall ensure that the evaluation criteria weigh heavily the extent to which the software:
(a) Monitors, in detail, application usage and website access of all student computing devices that are purchased with program money;
(b) Allows public access to aggregate student device utilization data at thestate, school district, and school level;
(c) Protects student data from being accessed by unauthorized users; and
(d) When used, is compliant with the requirements of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. Sec. 1232g.

(I)

(1) The UETN board shall distribute a license for the software described in Subsection (H) to a qualifying LEA.
(2) A qualifying LEA shall install the software described in Subsection (H) on a device used by a student.

(J) In a contract with an education technology provider described in this section, the UETN board and a qualifying LEA shall:

(1) Require an education technology provider to use student information received as part of providing services to the UETN board, board, or qualifying LEA, strictly for the purpose of providing the contracted services to the UETN board, board, or qualifying LEA;and
(2) Prohibit an education technology provider from:
(a) Using student information received as part of providing services to the UETN board, board, or qualifying LEA, for a use not described in the contract;
(b) Collecting student information that is unrelated to the services the education technology provider is required to perform pursuant to a contract with the UETN board, board of qualifying LEA; or

Section 5. {Master plan}

(A)

(1) In consultation with the board, the education consultant, and the advisory committee, the UETN board shall develop a master plan for the program to integrate the program into the state’s public education system.
(2) The UETN board shall submit the master plan to the board for final approval.

(B) Consistent with this part, the master plan shall include:

(1) A statement of purpose that describes the objectives or goals the UETN board will accomplish by implementing the program;
(2) A forecast for fundamental components of the program, including a forecast for:
(a) Student and teacher devices;
(b) Wi-Fi and wireless compatibly technology;
(c) Curriculum software;
(d) Assessment solutions;
(e) Technical support;
(f) Change management of LEAs;
(g) Professional development;
(h) Internet delivery and capacity; and
(i) Security and privacy of users;
(3) A determination of the requirement for:
(a) Statewide technology infrastructure; and
(b) Local LEA technology infrastructure;
(4) Standards for high quality professional learning related to implementing and maintaining the program;
(5) A detailed definition of at least one type of device to be used by LEAs and distributed to educators and students;
(6) A statewide technical support plan that will guide the implementation and maintenance of the program, including standards and competency requirements for technical support personnel;
(7) A grant program for qualifying LEAs developed in accordance with Section 6;
(8) Specifications for an LEA plan that include:
(a) Format and submission requirements; and
(b) Other LEA plan requirements, including the requirements described in Section 53A-1-1209;
(9) An inventory of the state public education system’s current technology resources, including software, and a plan to integrate those resources into the program;
(10) An ongoing evaluation process that is:
(a) Overseen by the board;
(b) Performed by the independent evaluator selected in Section 53A-1-1210; and
(c) Based on the criteria described in Section 53A-1-1210;
(11) Proposed rules that incorporate the principles of the master plan into the state’s public education system as a whole; and
(12) A plan to ensure long-term sustainability that:
(a) Accounts for the financial impacts of the program; and
(b) Facilitates the redirection of the LEA savings that arise from implementing the program.

(C) The UETN board shall integrate into the master plan privacy and security requirements of:

(1) Federal law;
(2) Sections 53A-13-301 and 53A-13-302; and
(3) Rules developed by the board.

(D) The UETN board shall complete the master plan on or before December 1, 2015.

Section 6. {Digital Teaching and Learning Grant Program – Grant money uses}

(A)

(1) In accordance with this part, the UETN board, in consultation with the board and the advisory committee, shall identify LEAs that qualify to receive a grant described in this section.
(2) The board shall distribute grant money to a qualifying LEA:
(a) Identified by the UETN board as a qualifying LEA; and
(b) In accordance with the distribution requirements of Section 53A-1-1208.

(B)

(1) The UETN board may only approve an LEA’s grant application and designate the LEA as a qualifying LEA if:
(a) The LEA’s LEA plan complies with the requirements described in Section 53A-1- 1209;
(b) The UETN board determines that the LEA’s LEA plan is rigorous and complete; and
(c) At least 11 members of the advisory committee vote in favor of approving the LEA.
(2) The advisory committee shall:
(a) Keep a record of advisory committee member votes for and against approval of each LEA plan, including the name of each advisory committee member who voted for or against each LEA plan; and
(b) Publish the record of advisory committee member votes described in Subsection (B)(2)(a) on a website accessible by:
(i) The UETN board;
(ii) The board;
(iii) An LEA and
(iv) A member of the public.

(C) The UETN board shall condition a grant on:

(1) UETN board approval of the LEA’s plan;
(2) Satisfactory progress toward achieving the participating LEA’s LEA plan objectives, goals, and outcomes;
(3) The LEA providing matching funds as described in Subsection (E); and
(4) Completion by the qualifying LEA of any UETN board requirement specific to receiving the grant award.

(D)

(1) An LEA grant applicant shall submit an LEA plan to the UETN board for approval.
(2) The UETN board shall:
(a) Review applicant LEA plans;
(b) Identify qualifying LEAs to receive grant money;and
(c)
(i) Approve the LEA plans of qualifying LEAs; or
(ii) Make recommendations to LEAs on how to improve LEA plans.

(E)

(1) A qualifying LEA shall use grant money to contract with one or more of the technology providers identified by the UETN board in Section 4.
(2) A qualifying LEA may contract with an education technology provider that was not identified by the UETN board as a prequalified education technology provider under Section 53A-1-1206; if:
(a) The education technology provider proposed in the LEA’s LEA plan meets the criteria described in Subsection 4(B);
(b) The LEA had a contract or other relationship with the education technology provider prior to the LEA submitting the LEA’s LEA plan; and
(c) The LEA’s contract or other relationship with the education technology provider proposed in the LEA plan was created in compliance with Title 63G, Chapter 6a, {Utah} Procurement Code.

(F) A qualifying LEA may not use grant money:

(1) To supplant money previously used for the LEA’s existing technology program;
(2) To fund non-technology programs;
(3) To purchase mobile telephones; or
(4) To fund voice or data plans for mobile telephones.

Section 7. {Distribution of grant money to qualifying LEAs}

(A) The board shall distribute money appropriated for the program to qualifying LEAs as described in this section.

(B)

(1) The amount available to distribute to qualifying charter schools is an amount equal to the product of:
(a) Enrollment on October 1 in the prior year at charter schools statewide, divided by enrollment on October 1 in the prior year in public schools statewide; and
(b) The total amount available for distribution under this section.
(2) The board shall distribute to qualifying charter schools the amount available for distribution to qualifying charter schools:
(a) In proportion to each qualifying charter school’s enrollment as a percentage of the total enrollment in qualifying charter schools; or
(b) As determined by the State Charter School Board and approved by the board.

(C) The board shall distribute grant money to the {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind in an amount equal to the product of:

(1) Enrollment on October 1 in the prior year at the {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind, divided by enrollment on October 1 in the prior year in public schools statewide; and
(2) The total amount available for distribution under this section.

(D) Of the funds available for distribution under this section after the allocation of funds for the {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind and qualifying charter schools, the board shall distribute grant money to qualifying LEAs that are school districts as follows:

(1) The board shall distribute two-thirds of the total funding available for qualifying LEAs that are school districts to the qualifying LEAs according to a funding formula adopted by the board that considers:
(a) The property tax effort of the school district, giving more funding to a school district making a high tax effort; and
(b) The school district’s ability to generate property tax revenue based on the per-student taxable value of property within the boundary of the school district, giving more funding to a school district with low taxable value per- student;and
(2) The board shall distribute one-third of the total funding available for qualifying LEAs that are school districts to the qualifying LEAs as follows:
(a) 10 percent of the funds shall be distributed on an equal basis; and

(b) The remaining 90 percent of the funds shall be distributed to the qualifying LEAs on a per-student basis. (E)

(1) Subject to the provisions of Subsections (E)(2) and (3), each LEA has an opportunity to receive an amount of money equal to the amount of money that the LEA would receive in year one of the program if the LEA’s LEA plan had been approved in year one as described in Section 6.
(2) If an LEA’s LEA plan is not approved during year one of the program, the board shall deposit the LEA’s allocation of program money described in Subsection (E)(1) into a separate account that is non-lapsing.
(3) The board shall award an LEA the LEA’s allocation of the year on program money in a subsequent year of the program if:
(a) The LEA’s LEA plan was not approved during year one of the program; and
(b) In the subsequent year, the LEA’s LEA plan is approved as described in Section 6.

(E)

(1) The board shall set minimum improvement benchmark standards in the school level outcomes described in Subsection (8)(A) that an LEA shall use to establish the LEA’s minimum improvement benchmarks described in Subsection (8)(D).
(2) The board may only distribute the following money to a qualifying LEA in year two and subsequent years if the qualifying LEA meets the minimum improvement benchmarks set in the qualifying LEA’s LEA plan:
(a) For a qualifying LEA that is a charter school, one-third of the money the qualifying LEA would receive from a distribution described in Subsection (B);
(b) For a qualifying LEA that is the {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind, one-third of the money the {Utah} Schools for the Deaf and the Blind would receive from a distribution described in Subsection (C); and
(c) For a qualifying LEA that is a school district, the money the qualifying LEA would receive from a distribution described in Subsection (D)(2).
(3) When setting the minimum improvement benchmark standards described in Subsection (E)(1) for year two, the board shall require an LEA to give substantially equal weight to:
(a) The extent to which the qualifying LEA follows, and complies with, the qualifying LEA’s LEA plan; and
(b) The extent to which the school level and student academic outcomes described in Subsections (8)(A)(2) and (8)(A)(3).
(4) When setting the minimum improvement benchmark standards described in Subsection (E)(1) for year three and subsequent years, the board shall require an LEA’s minimum improvement benchmarks to be based solely on the school level outcomes as defined in Subsections (8)(A)(2) and (8)(A)(3).

(F) If a qualifying LEA fails to meet the minimum improvement benchmarks included in the qualifying LEA’s LEA plan and loses the qualifying LEA’s distribution described in Subsection (E)(2), the qualifying LEA may resubmit the qualifying LEA’s LEA plan for approval, including goals to improve student performance and meet the minimum improvement benchmarks in the LEA plan.

(G) Beginning with year four of the program, the board shall proportionately decrease a qualifying LEA’s funding under this section:

(1) If only a percentage of the qualifying LEA’s students participate in the program;and
(2) By an amount equal to the percentage of the qualifying LEA’s students that do not participate in the program.

Section 8. {LEA plans}

(A) An LEA plan submitted to the UETN board for participation in the program shall include:

(1) A statement of purpose that describes the learning objectives, goals, and measurable outcomes the LEA will accomplish by implementing the program;
(2) Design criteria that enable the LEA to improve the following school level outcomes:
(a) Student achievement on statewide assessments; and
(b) Cost savings and improved efficiency relating to instructional materials facilities, and maintenance;
(3) In addition to the required school level outcomes described in Subsection (A)(2), design criteria that enable the LEA to improve other school level outcomes, including:
(a) Attendance,
(b) Discipline incidents;
(c) Parental involvement;
(d) Citizen involvement;
(e) Graduation rates;
(f) Student enrollment in higher education;
(g) Dropout rates;
(h) Student technology proficiency for college and career readiness; and
(i) Teacher satisfaction and engagement;
(4) An implementation process structured to yield the desired outcomes;
(5) A plan for infrastructure acquisition;
(6) A process for procurement and distribution of the goods and services the LEA intends to use as part of the LEA’s implementation of the program;
(7) A description necessary high quality, digital instructional materials aligned with UETN board standards;
(8) A detailed plan for student engagement in personalized learning;
(9) Technical support standards for implementation and maintenance of the program that:
(a) Include support for hardware and Internet access; and
(b) Remove technical support burdens from the classroom teacher;
(10) Proposed security policies, including security audits and remediation of identified lapses;
(11) An inventory of the LEA’s current technology resources, including software, and a description of how the LEA will integrate those resources into the LEA’s implementation of the program;
(12) A disclosure by the LEA of the LEA’s current technology expenditures;
(13) A description of how the LEA will:
(a) Provide high quality professional learning for educators, administrators,and support staff participating in the program, including ongoing periodic coaching;
(b) Provide special education students with appropriate software; and
(c) Meet other criteria established by the UETN board; and
(14) Except as provided in Subsection (C), an assurance that the LEA will implement the program in an entire school at a time and not introduce the program into schools in a partial manner.

(B) An LEA shall include the LEA’s proposed implementation of the program over multiple years in the LEA plan.

(C)

(1) An LEA is not required to implement the program an entire school at a time in an elementary school.
(2) An LEA is not required to implement the program in kindergarten through grade 4.

(D) An LEA plan shall include minimum improvement benchmarks in the school level outcomes described in Subsections (A)(2) and (A)(3):

(1) That the LEA will be required to meet for the LEA to continue to:
(a) Receive funding described in Subsection 7(E)(2); and
(b) Participate in the program in years three and on; and
(2) In accordance with the minimum improvement benchmark standards developed by the board in Subsection 7(E).

(E) As part of the LEA’s LEA plan, an LEA may propose to contract with an education technology provider that was not identified by the UETN board as a pre-qualified education technology provider under Subsection 4(B) if:

(1) The education technology provider proposed in the LEA’s LEA plan meets the criteria described in Subsection 4(B);
(2) The LEA had a contract or other relationship with the education technology provider prior to the LEA submitting the LEA’s LEA plan; and
(3) The LEA’s contract or other relationship with the education technology provider proposed in the LEA plan was created in compliance with Title 63G, Chapter 6a, {Utah} Procurement Code.

(F)

(1) As part of the LEA’s LEA plan, and LEA may propose to:
(a) Scale the LEA’s program implementation; or
(b) Limit the number of students within the LEA who will participate in the program.
(2) If the LEA scales the LEA’s program implementation or limits the number of students within the LEA who will participate in the program as described in Subsection (F)(1), beginning with year four of the program, the board shall proportionately decrease the LEA’s program money as described in Section 7(G).

(G) In preparing an LEA plan, an LEA shall encourage participation and input from parents, educators, technology support personnel, and school community councils.

(H) An LEA may subject an LEA plan to a peer review.

Section 9. {Board evaluation of program – Selection of an independent evaluator – UETN board and State Board of Education reporting requirements}

(A) In accordance with this section, the board shall oversee the ongoing review and evaluation to act as an independent contractor in assisting the board in the evaluation process under this section.

(B)

(1) The board shall select, through a request for proposals process, an independent evaluator to act as an independent contractor in assisting the board in the evaluation process under this section.
(2) The independent evaluator may not be a technology provider selected by the UETN board under this part or assist any person in responding to a request for proposals issued by the UETN board or by an LEA using money received under this party.
(3) The independent evaluator shall comply with the rules developed by the board and the UETN board under this party.

(C) Under the direction of the board, the independent evaluator shall:

(1) Review and evaluate the program using the criteria described in Subsection(D);
(2) Report to the board on the criteria described in Subsection (D) annually;
(3) Identify best practices within the program as required in Subsection (E); and

(4) Perform other related tasks assigned to the independent evaluator by the board.

(D) The independent evaluator shall review and evaluate the program as required by this section using the following criteria:

(1) Student achievement in core subject areas as measured by statewide assessments administered pursuant to Section 53A-1-603 {Utah};
(2) Student learning growth on statewide assessments in core subject areas administered pursuant to Section 53A-1-603 {Utah};

(E) The independent evaluator shall:

(1) Identify best practices for program implementation based on:
(a) The independent evaluator’s overall review of the program; and
(b) Independent research;
(2) Share the best practices identified in Subsection (E)(1) with:
(a) Participating LEAs;
(b) The board through the independent evaluator’s annual report to the board; and
(c) The UETN board; and
(3) Make recommendations to the board and the UETN board on modifications of LEA plans for qualifying LEAs both individually and collectively.

(F) The board and the UETN board shall jointly report annually to the Education Interim Committee on or before the committee’s November meeting regarding:

(1) The status of the program, including the level of technology integration in individual qualifying LEAs; and
(2) The results of the ongoing review and evaluation conducted under this section.

Section 10. {Qualification for assistance}

(A) Except as provided in Section 63M-1-908 or 63M-1-909, the administrator shall determine which industries, companies, and individuals qualify to receive money from the Industrial Assistance Account. Except as provided by Subsection (B), to qualify for financial assistance from the restricted account, an applicant shall:

(1) Demonstrate to the satisfaction of the administrator that the applicant will expend funds in {Utah} with employees, vendors, subcontractors, or other businesses in an amount proportional with money provided from the restricted account at a minimum ratio of 2 to 1 per year or other more stringent requirements as established from time to time by the board for a minimum period of five years beginning with the date the loan or grant was approved;
(2) Demonstrate to the satisfaction of the administrator the applicant’s ability to sustain economic activity in the state sufficient to repay, by means of cash or appropriate credits, the loan provided by the restricted account; and
(3) Satisfy other criteria the administrator considers appropriate.

(B)

(1) The administrator may exempt an applicant from the requirement of Subsection (A)(1) or (2) if:
(a) The financial assistance is provided to an applicant for the purpose of locating all or any portion of its operations to an economically disadvantaged rural area;
(b) The applicant is part of a targeted industry;
(c) The applicant is a quasi-public corporation organized under Title 16, Chapter 6a, {Utah} Revised Nonprofit Corporation Act, of Title 63E, Chapter 2, Independent Corporations Act, and its operations, as demonstrated to the satisfaction of the administrator, will provide significant economic stimulus to the growth of commerce and industry in the state;or
(d) The applicant is an entity offering an economic opportunity under Section 63M- 1- 909.
(2) The administrator may not exempt the applicant from the requirement under Subsection 63M-1-909(2)(b) that the loan be structured so that the repayment or return to the state equals at least the amount of the assistance together with an annual interest charge.

(C) The administrator shall:

(1) For applicants not described in Subsection (B)(1):
(a) Make findings as to whether or not each applicant has satisfied each of the conditions set forth in Subsection (A); and
(b) Monitor the continued compliance by each applicant with each of the conditions set forth in Subsection (A) for five years;
(2) For applicants described in Subsection (B)(1), make findings as to whether the economic activities of each applicant as resulted in the creation of new jobs on a per capita basis in the economically disadvantaged rural area or targeted industry in which the applicant is located;
(3) Monitor the compliance by each applicant with the provisions of any contract or agreement entered into between the applicant and the state as provided in Section 63M-1- 907; and
(4) Make funding decisions based upon appropriate findings and compliance.

Section 11.{Repealer}

This bill repeals: Section 53A-1-709, Smart School Technology Program; Section 63M-1-909.5,Selection of educational technology provider to implement whole-school one-to-one mobile device technology deployment plan for schools.

Section 12. {Appropriation for fiscal year 2014-2015}

(A) Under the terms and conditions of Title 63J, Chapter 1, Budgetary Procedures Act, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014, and ending June 30, 2015, the following sums of money are appropriated from resources not otherwise appropriated, or reduced from amounts previously appropriated, out of the funds or accounts indicated. These sums of money are in addition to any amounts previously appropriated for fiscal year 2015.

To the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network From Education Fund,

one-time $907,500

Schedule of Programs:

Digital Teaching and Learning Program $907,500

The legislature intends that:

(B) The {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network use the appropriations under this section to immediately begin implementation of the Digital Teaching and Learning Program created in Title 53A, Chapter 1, Part 12, Digital Teaching and Learning Program; and

(C) The appropriation under this section be:

(1) One-time; and
(2) non-lapsing.

Section 13. {Appropriation for fiscal year 2015-16}

(A) Under the terms and conditions of Title 63J, Chapter 1, Budgetary Procedures Act, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2015, and ending June 30, 2016, the following sums of money are appropriated from resources not otherwise appropriated, or reduced from amounts previously appropriated, out of the funds or accounts indicated. These sums of money are in addition to any amounts previously appropriated for fiscal year 2016.

To State Board of Education – Utah State Office of Education – Initiative Programs

From Education Fund $16,350,000

From Education Fund, one-time $50,000,000

Schedule of Programs:

Contracts and Grants – Digital Teaching and Learning Program $66,350,000

To the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network

From Education Fund $8,650,000

Schedule of Programs:

Digital Teaching and Learning Program $8,650,000

The Legislature intends that:

(B) The State Board of Education:

(1) Shall use $65,000,000 of the appropriation to the State Board of Education under this section to distribute grant money to qualifying LEAs as described in Sections 6 and 7.
(2) May use up to $1,000,000 of the appropriation to the State Board of Education to contract with an independent evaluator to conduct an evaluation of the Digital Teaching and Learning Program as required by Section 9; and
(3) May use up to $350,000 of the appropriation to the State Board of Education to oversee and evaluate the Digital Teaching and Learning Program created in Title 53A, Chapter 1, Part 12, Digital Teaching and Learning Program;

(C) The {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network:

(1) May use up to $6,700,000 of the appropriation to the Utah Education and Telehealth Network for infrastructure and technology support for the Digital Teaching and Learning Program created in Title 53A, Chapter 1, Part 12, Digital Teaching and Learning Program;
(2) May use up to $750,000 of the appropriation to the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network to contract with an education consultant as required by Section 4;
(3) May use up to $850,000 of the appropriation to the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network to administer and implement the Digital Teaching and Learning Program created in Title 53A, Chapter 1, Part 12, Digital Teaching and Learning Program;and
(4) May use up to $350,000 of the appropriation to the {Utah} Education and Telehealth Network to contract with one or more technology providers to provide software to monitor student and teacher usage of technology in qualifying LEA schools as required in Section 4; and

(D) The appropriations under this section be:

(1) Ongoing; and
(2) Non-lapsing

Section 14. {Effective date}

(A) Except as provided in Subsection (B), if approved by two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, this bill takes effect upon approval by the governor, or the day following the constitutional time limit of Utah Constitution, Article VII, Section 8, without the governor’s signature, or in the case of a veto, the date of veto override.

(B) Uncodified Section 14, Appropriation, takes effect on July 1, 2015.