(1)Existing law requires local educational agencies, as defined, to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program. Existing law requires each special education local plan area to ensure that a continuum of program options is available to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs for special education and related services, as required by federal law. Existing law requires the continuum of program options to include, among other options, a resource specialist program, designated instruction and services, and special classes, as provided.

Existing law requires the resource specialist program to provide, among other things, monitoring of pupil progress on a regular basis, participation in the review and revision of individualized education programs, as appropriate, and referral of pupils who do not demonstrate appropriate progress to the individualized education program team. Existing law requires caseloads for resource specialists to be stated in specified local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the State Board of Education, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 28 pupils.

This bill would require local educational agencies to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the local educational agency in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires special classes that serve pupils with similar and more intensive educational needs to be available, and authorizes special classes to enroll pupils only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, on or before July 1, 2027, to recommend a maximum adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for those special classes, as provided, and to post the recommendation on the departments internet website. The bill would require the Superintendent to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the state board on or before April 1, 2027, as specified.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

(1)Existing law requires local educational agencies, as defined, to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program. Existing law requires each special education local plan area to ensure that a continuum of program options is available to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs for special education and related services, as required by federal law. Existing law requires the continuum of program options to include, among other options, a resource specialist program, designated instruction and services, and special classes, as provided.

Existing law requires the resource specialist program to provide, among other things, monitoring of pupil progress on a regular basis, participation in the review and revision of individualized education programs, as appropriate, and referral of pupils who do not demonstrate appropriate progress to the individualized education program team. Existing law requires caseloads for resource specialists to be stated in specified local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the State Board of Education, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 28 pupils.

This bill would require local educational agencies to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the local educational agency in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires special classes that serve pupils with similar and more intensive educational needs to be available, and authorizes special classes to enroll pupils only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, on or before July 1, 2027, to recommend a maximum adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for those special classes, as provided, and to post the recommendation on the departments internet website. The bill would require the Superintendent to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the state board on or before April 1, 2027, as specified.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

(1)Existing law requires local educational agencies, as defined, to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program. Existing law requires each special education local plan area to ensure that a continuum of program options is available to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs for special education and related services, as required by federal law. Existing law requires the continuum of program options to include, among other options, a resource specialist program, designated instruction and services, and special classes, as provided.

Existing law requires the resource specialist program to provide, among other things, monitoring of pupil progress on a regular basis, participation in the review and revision of individualized education programs, as appropriate, and referral of pupils who do not demonstrate appropriate progress to the individualized education program team. Existing law requires caseloads for resource specialists to be stated in specified local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the State Board of Education, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 28 pupils.

This bill would require local educational agencies to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the local educational agency in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires special classes that serve pupils with similar and more intensive educational needs to be available, and authorizes special classes to enroll pupils only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, on or before July 1, 2027, to establish recommend a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for those special classes, as provided, and to post the recommendation on the departments internet website. The bill would require the Superintendent to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the state board on or before April 1, 2027, as specified.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

(1)Existing law requires local educational agencies, as defined, to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program. Existing law requires each special education local plan area to ensure that a continuum of program options is available to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs for special education and related services, as required by federal law. Existing law requires the continuum of program options to include, among other options, a resource specialist program, designated instruction and services, and special classes, as provided.

Existing law requires the resource specialist program to provide, among other things, monitoring of pupil progress on a regular basis, participation in the review and revision of individualized education programs, as appropriate, and referral of pupils who do not demonstrate appropriate progress to the individualized education program team. Existing law requires caseloads for resource specialists to be stated in specified local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the State Board of Education, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 28 pupils.

This bill would require local educational agencies to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the local educational agency in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained. By imposing additional duties on local officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law requires special classes that serve pupils with similar and more intensive educational needs to be available, and authorizes special classes to enroll pupils only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

This bill would require the Superintendent of Public Instruction, on or before July 1, 2027, to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for those special classes, as provided, and to post the recommendation on the departments internet website. The bill would require the Superintendent to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the state board on or before April 1, 2027, as specified.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

(1)Existing law requires local educational agencies agencies, as defined, to identify, locate, and assess individuals with exceptional needs and to provide those pupils with a free appropriate public education in the least restrictive environment, with special education and related services as reflected in an individualized education program. Existing law requires each special education local plan area to ensure that a continuum of program options is available to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs for special education and related services, as required by federal law. Existing law requires the continuum of program options to include, among other options, a resource specialist program, designated instruction and services, and special classes, as provided.

Existing law requires the resource specialist program to provide, among other things, monitoring of pupil progress on a regular basis, participation in the review and revision of individualized education programs, as appropriate, and referral of pupils who do not demonstrate appropriate progress to the individualized education program team. Existing law requires caseloads for resource specialists to be stated in specified local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the State Board of Education, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 28 pupils. Existing law prohibits the average caseload for language, speech, and hearing specialists in special education local plan areas from exceeding 55 cases, unless the local plan specifies a higher average caseload and the reasons for the greater average caseload.

(2)Existing law requires special classes that serve pupils with similar and more intensive educational needs to be available, and authorizes special classes to enroll pupils only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

(3)The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Existing law expresses legislative findings and declarations regarding the rights of individuals with exceptional needs and the Master Plan for Special Education.

This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to that provision.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 560

Author:(Addis)

As Amended Ver:August 29, 2025

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to recommend a maximum adult-to-student staffing ratio for special day classes for students with disabilities ages three to 22, and requires local educational agencies (LEAs) and charter schools to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists.

Senate Amendments

1. Add chief business officials, researchers and representatives with expertise in inclusive practices, and advocates focused on equity and disability rights, to the list of individuals with whom the SPI would be required to consult, and requires that the individuals consulted represent the state's geographic diversity, including, but not limited to, rural, urban, and high-need regions.
2. Requires the SPI to consider, in making this recommendation:
3. Determining appropriate staffing ratios to enhance pupil outcomes in accordance with the principles of the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and state law; and
4. The supports needed for general and special educators to succeed in implementing inclusive models.

COMMENTS

Initial assessments conducted by RSP teachers. This bill requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

Current law establishes a caseload limit of 28 students for resource specialists. Additionally, resource specialists conduct initial assessments to determine whether students qualify for special education services. As initial assessments are not included in the caseload limit under current law, the distribution of this workload is typically determined through collective bargaining. One school district's contract, for example, entitles resource specialists to up to eight hours of additional compensation per initial assessment conducted.

Adult-to-student ratios in special day classes. This bill requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratios for special day classes for students ages three to 22, and to post this recommendation on the CDE website.

This bill also requires the SPI to take numerous factors into consideration when making this recommendation, including the varying needs of students depending upon their support needs, their ages, and instructional settings, as well as constraints such as workforce and facility needs, and conditions in small and rural LEAs. Finally, the SPI would have to take into account the effects of this policy on the education of students in inclusive settings.

Current law authorizes school districts to place students in special day classes that serve students with similar and more intensive educational needs, only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

Unlike for grades K-3, there is no class size or adult-to-student recommended ratio for special day classes. Each LEA or SELPA sets limits through collective bargaining. For example, one SELPA's plan lists ratios ranging from 1:10 for classes serving students with mild to moderate support needs, to 1:3 for classes serving students with extensive support needs. When certain total enrollments are reached, the process of opening a new class is explored. For preschool special day classes, a ratio of 1:5 is required, pursuant to existing law.

It is unclear how many states have adult-to-student ratio requirements for special day classes, but New York state regulations establish a maximum class size of 15 students, or 12 students in a state-operated or state-supported school, with specified exceptions.

According to the Author

"Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California's Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve."

Arguments in Support

The California Federation of Teachers writes, "The ability of our members to properly serve [students with IEPs is] often limited by underfunding, understaffing, and an overall unwillingness of our education infrastructure to treat the needs of exceptional students with the respect they deserve. We have heard countless stories of special day classes—those focusing solely on special education students—being eliminated, students with relatively severe disabilities being placed in crowded general education environments that clearly violate IEPs, and other harmful outcomes that at best limit the ability of these students to learn and at worst jeopardize their safety.

Our members who conduct initial assessments of students who may benefit from an IEP also report that this critically important—but very time-consuming—work is often not factored into their existing work load, forcing them into the impossible position into somehow doing multiple jobs at once at the expense of their own mental and even physical health. This highly concerning state of affairs also harms the student's right to an adequate IEP and further degrades educational quality. It also goes without saying that this situation contributes to burnout and severely complicates our ability to recruit and retain these essential workers.

AB 560 (Addis) approaches this problem by directing the California Department of Education to implement special day class size limits that would, if implemented, guarantee adequate attention to exceptional students and a reasonable workload for workers. Not only will this present a major step toward the quality of education the students deserve, it's also critically important for their safety and mental well-being."

Arguments in Opposition

The Small School Districts Association writes, "While we recognize the critical importance of providing high-quality educational environments for students with disabilities, we are concerned that even a "recommended" ratio—absent a formal mandate—could result in serious unintended consequences for local school districts, particularly those in small or rural communities. As we have seen with other state-issued "guidance," such recommendations often become de facto mandates, cited in collective bargaining negotiations as minimum acceptable staffing levels. This can place immense fiscal and operational strain on small and/or rural school districts with limited resources and unique circumstances.

AB 560 implicitly assumes a uniform solution for districts of all sizes and settings. However, the educational landscape across California is extraordinarily diverse. A staffing recommendation that may be appropriate in a large, urban district is often ill-suited to the realities of rural and remote communities. Small districts face challenges such as geographic isolation, small candidate pools, and fluctuating enrollment—all of which make rigid staffing benchmarks both impractical and financially unsustainable.

California has long championed the principle of local control, entrusting educators and school leaders to make decisions that best meet the needs of their communities. AB 560 moves in the opposite direction. By elevating a standardized staffing ratio—regardless of how it is labeled—it risks diminishing the ability of local leaders to make context-specific decisions in the best interest of their students. Local boards, administrators, and educators are best positioned to determine appropriate staffing levels based on the resources, programs, and student populations in their districts."

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. The California Department of Education (CDE) estimates General Fund costs of $546,000 for 3.0 positions to investigate the anticipated increase in complaints to the department, and additional one-time General Fund costs of $350,000 to convene the workgroup to make recommendations. The estimate for the workgroup is based on previous efforts undertaken by CDE, including the workgroup established by the 2020 Budget Act to examine and propose alternate pathways to a high school diploma and the IEP Workgroup, also established by the 2020 Budget Act, which was tasked with designing a statewide IEP template.
2. To the extent that the workgroup recommends staffing ratios for special classes that result in smaller class sizes for LEAs, this bill could result in additional, unknown Proposition 98 General Fund costs pressures for those LEAs to implement smaller class sizes. The associated costs would vary by LEA as they would depend on several factors, such as their existing staffing levels and availability of classrooms and infrastructure needs. It is unclear if these activities would constitute a reimbursable mandate.

VOTES:

ASM EDUCATION: 9-0-0

YES: Muratsuchi, Hoover, Addis, Alvarez, Bonta, Castillo, Garcia, Lowenthal, Patel

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 14-0-1

YES: Wicks, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Hart, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0-0

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer‑Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Kalra, Krell, Lackey, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

UPDATED

VERSION: August 29, 2025

CONSULTANT: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0001867

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 560

Author: Addis (D), et al.

Amended: 8/29/25 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 7-0, 7/9/25

AYES: Pérez, Ochoa Bogh, Cabaldon, Choi, Cortese, Gonzalez, Laird

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 6-1, 8/29/25

AYES: Caballero, Seyarto, Cabaldon, Grayson, Richardson, Wahab

NOES: Dahle

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 6/2/25 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Special education: resource specialists: special classes

SOURCE: California Teachers Association

CFT - A Union of Educators & Classified Professionals

DIGEST:

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to recommend a maximum adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22, and requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to take all reasonable steps to equitably distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments among all resource specialists, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which ensures that students with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. (20 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 1400 et seq.)
2. Authorizes school districts to place students in special classes only when the nature or severity of the student’s disability precludes satisfactory education in a regular class with supplementary aids and services. (Education Code (EC) § 56364.2)
3. Requires caseloads for Resource Support Program (RSP) teachers to be limited to 28 students, and prohibits RSP teachers from enrolling a student for a majority of the school day without individualized education program (IEP) team approval. (EC § 56362)

This bill:

1) Requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments equally among all resource specialists employed by the LEA, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

2) Requires the SPI, on or before July 1, 2027, to recommend and post on the California Department of Education (CDE) website a maximum adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes (special day classes) serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22.

3) Requires the SPI, in establishing the recommended ratio, to:

a) Consult with a wide range of stakeholders, including education specialists, administrators, paraprofessionals, and parents—with a majority of consultees being current special class teachers—and ensure representation from geographically and demographically diverse communities.

b) Consult with researchers and disability rights advocates with expertise in inclusive practices.

c) Consider factors such as student support needs (mild to moderate vs. extensive), age ranges, educational settings (preschool, elementary, secondary, nonpublic schools), LEA practices, national models, workforce and facility constraints, conditions in small and rural LEAs, and the impact of staffing on inclusive education under the federal IDEA.

4) Requires the SPI to submit a report with their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the State Board of Education by April 1, 2027.

Comments

1. Need for this bill. According to the author, “Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California’s Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve.”
2. Assessment workload is not accounted for in caseload limits. Resource specialists play a critical role in determining whether a student qualifies for special education services through initial assessments. These evaluations can be time-intensive and high-stakes, yet current law only limits instructional caseloads and does not address this additional workload. In practice, some districts offer supplemental compensation or rely on informal distribution practices, but implementation varies widely. By requiring LEAs to take reasonable steps to equitably distribute assessment duties, this bill seeks to create a more manageable and consistent workload across specialists, reducing burnout and ensuring timely assessments for students.
3. Special class staffing varies widely, with no statewide guidance. Unlike general education classrooms, which have statutory caps or recommended ratios in the early grades, there is no statewide class size or adult-to-student ratio guidance for special day classes serving students with disabilities. Staffing ratios in these settings are typically determined locally and vary significantly by district, disability type, and setting. Some Special Education Local Plan Areas (SELPAs) set internal targets, but these may not reflect research-based recommendations or be responsive to broader inclusion goals. The absence of state guidance can result in overcrowded classes, inconsistent supports, and a misalignment between program design and student needs.
4. A data-informed recommendation, not a mandate. Rather than establishing mandatory caps, this bill directs the SPI to develop a recommended staffing ratio for special classes, informed by consultation with educators, administrators, parents, and researchers. The required considerations—including the needs of students with varying disabilities, different age groups, and diverse instructional settings—reflect an understanding that “one size fits all” guidance may not be appropriate in special education. A recommendation, rather than a mandate, provides a research-informed benchmark for local decision-making without limiting LEA flexibility.
5. Supporting inclusion through appropriate staffing. The bill appropriately links special class staffing ratios to federal requirements for education in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Research shows that successful inclusion depends not only on placing students with disabilities in general education classrooms, but on equipping educators with adequate adult support. Understaffed special classes can lead to inappropriate placements, as LEAs may lack the resources to support students in inclusive settings. By considering inclusive practices and educator support as part of the ratio-setting process, this bill underscores the interdependence of staffing adequacy and meaningful access to the general curriculum.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• The California Department of Education (CDE) estimates General Fund costs of $546,000 for 3.0 positions to investigate the anticipated increase in complaints to the department, and additional one-time General Fund costs of $350,000 to convene the workgroup to make recommendations. The estimate for the workgroup is based on previous efforts undertaken by CDE, including the workgroup established by the 2020 Budget Act to examine and propose alternate pathways to a high school diploma and the IEP Workgroup, also established by the 2020 Budget Act, which was tasked with designing a statewide IEP template.
• To the extent that the workgroup recommends staffing ratios for special classes that result in smaller class sizes for LEAs, this bill could result in additional, unknown Proposition 98 General Fund costs pressures for those LEAs to implement smaller class sizes. The associated costs would vary by LEA as they would depend on several factors, such as their existing staffing levels and availability of classrooms and infrastructure needs. It is unclear if these activities would constitute a reimbursable mandate.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/29/25)

California Teachers Association (Co-Source)
CFT - A Union of Educators & Classified Professionals (Co-Source)
California School Employees Association
California State Council of Service Employees International Union
California State PTA
Easterseals Northern California
Pangea's Civic Youth Activists
San Francisco Unified School District

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/29/25)

Small School Districts Association

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 6/2/25

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Dixon, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Kalra, Krell, Lackey, Lee, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Ransom, Celeste Rodriguez, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Schiavo, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Stefani, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Ward, Wicks, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

Prepared by: Ian Johnson / ED. / (916) 651-4105

9/2/25 17:59:55

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

AB 560 (Addis) - Special education: resource specialists: special classes

Bill Summary:

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22. This bill also requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to take all reasonable steps to equitably distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments among all resource specialists, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 29, 2025

Fiscal Impact:

• The California Department of Education (CDE) estimates General Fund costs of $546,000 for 3.0 positions to investigate the anticipated increase in complaints to the department, and additional one-time General Fund costs of $350,000 to convene the workgroup to make recommendations. The estimate for the workgroup is based on previous efforts undertaken by CDE, including the workgroup established by the 2020 Budget Act to examine and propose alternate pathways to a high school diploma and the IEP Workgroup, also established by the 2020 Budget Act, which was tasked with designing a statewide IEP template.
• To the extent that the workgroup recommends staffing ratios for special classes that result in smaller class sizes for LEAs, this bill could result in additional, unknown Proposition 98 General Fund costs pressures for those LEAs to implement smaller class sizes. The associated costs would vary by LEA as they would depend on several factors, such as their existing staffing levels and availability of classrooms and infrastructure needs. It is unclear if these activities would constitute a reimbursable mandate.

Author Amendments:

Require the SPI to recommend, rather than establish, the maximum adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special education classes, as specified.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular Session

AB 560 (Addis) - Special education: resource specialists: special classes

Bill Summary:

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22. This bill also requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to take all reasonable steps to equitably distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments among all resource specialists, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

Fiscal Impact:

• The California Department of Education (CDE) estimates General Fund costs of $546,000 for 3.0 positions to investigate the anticipated increase in complaints to the department, and additional one-time General Fund costs of $350,000 to convene the workgroup to make recommendations. The estimate for the workgroup is based on previous efforts undertaken by CDE, including the workgroup established by the 2020 Budget Act to examine and propose alternate pathways to a high school diploma and the IEP Workgroup, also established by the 2020 Budget Act, which was tasked with designing a statewide IEP template.
• To the extent that the workgroup recommends staffing ratios for special classes that result in smaller class sizes for LEAs, this bill could result in additional, unknown Proposition 98 General Fund costs pressures for those LEAs to implement smaller class sizes. The associated costs would vary by LEA as they would depend on several factors, such as their existing staffing levels and availability of classrooms and infrastructure needs. It is unclear if these activities would constitute a reimbursable mandate.

Background:

Existing law establishes the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which ensures that students with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment.

Existing law authorizes school districts to place students in special classes only when the nature or severity of the student’s disability precludes satisfactory education in a regular class with supplementary aids and services.

Proposed Law:

This bill requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments equally among all resource specialists employed by the LEA, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

This bill requires the SPI, on or before July 1, 2027, to establish and post on CDE’s website a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes (special day classes) serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22.

This bill requires the SPI, in establishing the recommended ratio, to do the following:

1. Consult with a wide range of stakeholders, including education specialists, administrators, paraprofessionals, and parents, with a majority of consultees being current special class teachers and ensure representation from geographically and demographically diverse communities.
2. Consult with researchers and disability rights advocates with expertise in inclusive practices.
3. Consider factors such as student support needs (mild to moderate vs. extensive), age ranges, educational settings (preschool, elementary, secondary, nonpublic schools), LEA practices, national models, workforce and facility constraints, conditions in small and rural LEAs, and the impact of staffing on inclusive education under the federal IDEA.

This bill requires the SPI to submit a report with their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the State Board of Education by April 1, 2027.

Staff Comments:

Currently, there is no statewide class size or adult-to-student ratio guidance for special day classes serving students with disabilities which is different from general education classrooms which have statutory caps or recommended ratios in the early grades. Staffing ratios in special education settings are typically determined locally and vary significantly by district, disability type, and setting. Some Special Education Local Plan Areas (SELPAs) set internal targets, but these may not reflect research-based recommendations or be responsive to broader inclusion goals. This bill directs the SPI to develop a recommended staffing ratio for special classes, informed by consultation with educators, administrators, parents, and researchers. It would also require the SPI to consider the needs of students with varying disabilities, different age groups, and diverse instructional settings. According to the author, “Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California’s Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve.”

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Senator Sasha Renée Pérez, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: AB 560 Hearing Date: July 9, 2025

Subject: Special education: resource specialists: special classes.

SUMMARY

This bill requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22, and requires local educational agencies (LEAs) to take all reasonable steps to equitably distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments among all resource specialists, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

BACKGROUND

Existing law:

1. Establishes the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which ensures that students with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.)
2. Authorizes school districts to place students in special classes only when the nature or severity of the student’s disability precludes satisfactory education in a regular class with supplementary aids and services. (Education Code (EC) § 56364.2)
3. Requires caseloads for Resource Support Program (RSP) teachers to be limited to 28 students, and prohibits RSP teachers from enrolling a student for a majority of the school day without individualized education program (IEP) team approval. (EC § 56362)

ANALYSIS

This bill:

1. Requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial special education assessments equally among all resource specialists employed by the LEA, unless otherwise collectively bargained.
2. Requires the SPI, on or before July 1, 2027, to establish and post on the California Department of Education (CDE) website a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special classes (special day classes) serving students with disabilities ages 3 to 22.
3. Requires the SPI, in establishing the recommended ratio, to:
   1. Consult with a wide range of stakeholders, including education specialists, administrators, paraprofessionals, and parents—with a majority of consultees being current special class teachers—and ensure representation from geographically and demographically diverse communities.
   2. Consult with researchers and disability rights advocates with expertise in inclusive practices.
   3. Consider factors such as student support needs (mild to moderate vs. extensive), age ranges, educational settings (preschool, elementary, secondary, nonpublic schools), LEA practices, national models, workforce and facility constraints, conditions in small and rural LEAs, and the impact of staffing on inclusive education under the federal IDEA.
4. Requires the SPI to submit a report with their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature and the State Board of Education by April 1, 2027.

STAFF COMMENTS

1. Need for the bill. According to the author, “Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California’s Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve.”
2. Assessment workload is not accounted for in caseload limits. Resource specialists play a critical role in determining whether a student qualifies for special education services through initial assessments. These evaluations can be time-intensive and high-stakes, yet current law only limits instructional caseloads and does not address this additional workload. In practice, some districts offer supplemental compensation or rely on informal distribution practices, but implementation varies widely. By requiring LEAs to take reasonable steps to equitably distribute assessment duties, this bill seeks to create a more manageable and consistent workload across specialists, reducing burnout and ensuring timely assessments for students.
3. Special class staffing varies widely, with no statewide guidance. Unlike general education classrooms, which have statutory caps or recommended ratios in the early grades, there is no statewide class size or adult-to-student ratio guidance for special day classes serving students with disabilities. Staffing ratios in these settings are typically determined locally and vary significantly by district, disability type, and setting. Some Special Education Local Plan Areas (SELPAs) set internal targets, but these may not reflect research-based recommendations or be responsive to broader inclusion goals. The absence of state guidance can result in overcrowded classes, inconsistent supports, and a misalignment between program design and student needs.
4. A data-informed recommendation, not a mandate. Rather than establishing mandatory caps, this bill directs the SPI to develop a recommended staffing ratio for special classes, informed by consultation with educators, administrators, parents, and researchers. The required considerations—including the needs of students with varying disabilities, different age groups, and diverse instructional settings—reflect an understanding that “one size fits all” guidance may not be appropriate in special education. A recommendation, rather than a mandate, provides a research-informed benchmark for local decision-making without limiting LEA flexibility.
5. Supporting inclusion through appropriate staffing. The bill appropriately links special class staffing ratios to federal requirements for education in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Research shows that successful inclusion depends not only on placing students with disabilities in general education classrooms, but on equipping educators with adequate adult support. Understaffed special classes can lead to inappropriate placements, as LEAs may lack the resources to support students in inclusive settings. By considering inclusive practices and educator support as part of the ratio-setting process, this bill underscores the interdependence of staffing adequacy and meaningful access to the general curriculum.

SUPPORT

California Teachers Association (co-sponsor)
CFT - A Union of Educators & Classified Professionals, AFT, AFL-CIO (co-sponsor)
California State Council of Service Employees International Union
California State PTA
San Francisco Unified School District

1 Individual

OPPOSITION

Small School Districts Association

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 560

Author:(Addis)

As Amended Ver:April 21, 2025

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), on or before July 1, 2027, to establish maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratios for special day classes for students with disabilities ages three to 22, and requires local educational agencies (LEAs) and charter schools to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists.

Major Provisions

1. Requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.
2. Requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish a maximum recommended adult to student staffing ratios for special day classes for students ages 3 to 22, and post this recommendation on the California Department of Education (CDE) website.
3. Requires the SPI, in establishing this recommendation, to:
4. Consult with the following individuals:
5. Current credentialed education specialists teaching in a special class setting. Requires that a majority of the individuals consulted meet this requirement;
6. Administrators serving at school sites, school districts, county office of education (COE), and special education local plan areas (SELPAs);
7. Paraprofessionals serving in special class settings; and
8. Parents of students with exceptional needs who are served in special class settings.
9. Consider the following:
10. Varying needs of students, including students with mild to moderate support needs and students with extensive support needs;
11. Varying needs of students by age;
12. Types of school setting, including preschool, elementary, secondary schools, and nonpublic schools;
13. Existing practices among LEAs;
14. Other state's adult to student ratios for special classes;
15. Constraints such as workforce and facility needs, and conditions in small and rural LEAs; and
16. Effects on education of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment, as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
17. Requires the SPI to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal Committees of the Legislature, and the State Board of Education (SBE), by April 1, 2027.

COMMENTS

Initial assessments conducted by RSP teachers. This bill requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

Current law establishes a caseload limit of 28 students for resource specialists. Additionally, resource specialists conduct initial assessments to determine whether students qualify for special education services. As initial assessments are not included in the caseload limit under current law, the distribution of this workload is typically determined through collective bargaining. One school district's contract, for example, entitles resource specialists to up to eight hours of additional compensation per initial assessment conducted.

Adult-to-student ratios in special day classes. This bill requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratios for special day classes for students ages three to 22, and to post this recommendation on the CDE website.

This bill also requires the SPI to take numerous factors into consideration when making this recommendation, including the varying needs of students depending upon their support needs, their ages, and instructional settings, as well as constraints such as workforce and facility needs, and conditions in small and rural LEAs. Finally, the SPI would have to take into account the effects of this policy on the education of students in inclusive settings.

Current law authorizes school districts to place students in special day classes that serve students with similar and more intensive educational needs, only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

Unlike for grades K-3, there is no class size or adult-to-student recommended ratio for special day classes. Each LEA or SELPA sets limits through collective bargaining. For example, one SELPA's plan lists ratios ranging from 1:10 for classes serving students with mild to moderate support needs, to 1:3 for classes serving students with extensive support needs. When certain total enrollments are reached, the process of opening a new class is explored. For preschool special day classes, a ratio of 1:5 is required, pursuant to existing law.

It is unclear how many states have adult-to-student ratio requirements for special day classes, but New York state regulations establish a maximum class size of 15 students, or 12 students in a state-operated or state-supported school, with specified exceptions.

According to the Author

According to the author "Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California's Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve."

Arguments in Support

The California Federation of Teachers writes, "The ability of our members to properly serve [students with IEPs is] often limited by underfunding, understaffing, and an overall unwillingness of our education infrastructure to treat the needs of exceptional students with the respect they deserve. We have heard countless stories of special day classes—those focusing solely on special education students—being eliminated, students with relatively severe disabilities being placed in crowded general education environments that clearly violate IEPs, and other harmful outcomes that at best limit the ability of these students to learn and at worst jeopardize their safety.

Our members who conduct initial assessments of students who may benefit from an IEP also report that this critically important—but very time-consuming—work is often not factored into their existing work load, forcing them into the impossible position into somehow doing multiple jobs at once at the expense of their own mental and even physical health. This highly concerning state of affairs also harms the student's right to an adequate IEP and further degrades educational quality. It also goes without saying that this situation contributes to burnout and severely complicates our ability to recruit and retain these essential workers.

AB 560 (Addis) approaches this problem by directing the California Department of Education to implement special day class size limits that would, if implemented, guarantee adequate attention to exceptional students and a reasonable workload for workers. Not only will this present a major step toward the quality of education the students deserve, it's also critically important for their safety and mental well-being."

Arguments in Opposition

None on file

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, one-time General Fund costs of approximately $300,000 for the CDE to establish and publish maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratios for special day classes.

VOTES

ASM EDUCATION: 9-0-0

YES: Muratsuchi, Hoover, Addis, Alvarez, Bonta, Castillo, Garcia, Lowenthal, Patel

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 14-0-1

YES: Wicks, Arambula, Calderon, Caloza, Dixon, Elhawary, Fong, Mark González, Hart, Pacheco, Pellerin, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez

UPDATED

VERSION: April 21, 2025

CONSULTANT: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN: 0000590

Date of Hearing: May 14, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 560

Author:(Addis) – As Amended Ver:April 21, 2025

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill requires a local educational agency (LEA) to take all reasonable steps to distribute the workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists in an equal manner and requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to establish, on or before July 1, 2027, a maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratio for special day classes for pupils three to 22 years old and post the recommendation on the California Department of California’s (CDE) internet website.

FISCAL EFFECT:

One-time General Fund costs of approximately $300,000 for the CDE to establish and publish maximum recommended adult-to-pupil staffing ratios for special day classes.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California’s Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve.

1. Background. Initial Assessments Conducted by Resource Specialist Program Teachers. Current law establishes a caseload limit of 28 students for resource specialists. Additionally, resource specialists conduct initial assessments to determine whether students qualify for special education services. The caseload limit under current law does not contemplate initial assessment workload, therefore the distribution of this workload is typically determined through collective bargaining. One school district’s contract, for example, entitles resource specialists to up to eight hours of additional compensation per initial assessment conducted.

This bill requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

Adult-to-pupil Ratios in Special Day Classes. Current law authorizes school districts to place a students in special day classes that serve students with similar and more intensive educational needs than other students only when the nature or severity of the student’s disability is such that it precludes satisfactory education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support.

Unlike for kindergarten through third grade, there is no class size or adult-to-pupil ratio recommended for special day classes. Each LEA or Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) sets limits through collective bargaining. For example, one SELPA’s plan lists ratios ranging from 1:10 for classes serving students with mild to moderate support needs, to 1:3 for classes serving students with extensive support needs. When certain total enrollments are reached, the process of opening a new class is explored. For preschool special day classes, a ratio of 1:5 is required, pursuant to existing law.

This bill requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratio for special day classes for students ages three to 22, and post this recommendation on the CDE website.

Analysis Prepared by: Aaron Heredia / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 30, 2025

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Al Muratsuchi, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 560 (

Author:Addis) – As Amended Ver:April 21, 2025

SUBJECT: Special education: Special Education Teams: resource specialists: special classes

SUMMARY: Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on or before July,1 2027, to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratio for special day classes for students with disabilities ages 3 to 22, and requires local educational agencies (LEAs) and charter schools to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.
2. Requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish a maximum recommended adult to student staffing ratio for special day classes for students ages 3 to 22, and post this recommendation on the California Department of Education (CDE) website.
3. Requires the SPI, in establishing this recommendation, to:
4. Consult with the following individuals:
5. Current credentialed education specialists teaching in a special class setting. Requires that a majority of the individuals consulted meet this requirement;
6. Administrators serving at school sites, school districts, county office of education (COE), and special education local plan areas (SELPAs);
7. Paraprofessionals serving in special class settings; and
8. Parents of students with exceptional needs who are served in special class settings.
9. Consider the following:
10. Varying needs of students, including students with mild to moderate support needs and students with extensive support needs;
11. Varying needs of students by age;
12. Types of school setting, including preschool, elementary, secondary schools, and nonpublic schools;
13. Existing practices among LEAs;
14. Other state’s adult to student ratios for special classes;
15. Constraints such as workforce and facility needs, and conditions in small and rural LEAs; and
16. Effects on education of students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment, as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
17. Requires the SPI to report their recommendations to the appropriate policy and fiscal Committees of the Legislature, and the State Board of Education (SBE), by April 1, 2027.

EXISTING LAW:

1. In federal law, establishes the IDEA, in order to ensure that all children with disabilities have a free appropriate public education (FAPE) that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living, among other purposes. (20 U.S.C. Section 1400)
2. Requires that, in accordance with federal law, each public agency ensure the following to address the least restrictive environment for individuals with exceptional needs such that:
3. To the maximum extent appropriate, individuals with exceptional needs, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and
4. Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of individuals with exceptional needs from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. (20 U.S.C. Section 1412)
5. In federal law, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, prohibits an individual with a disability, as defined, from, solely by reason of his or her disability, being excluded from the participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. (29 U.S.C. Section 794)
6. Requires that caseloads for resource specialists be stated in local policies and in accordance with regulations established by the SBE, and prohibits a resource specialist from having a caseload that exceeds 20 students. (Education Code (EC) 56362)
7. Prohibits the average caseload for language, speech, and hearing specialists in SELPAs from exceeding 55 cases, unless the local plan specifies a higher average caseload and the reasons for the greater average caseload. (EC 56363.3)
8. Authorizes special classes that serve students with similar and more intensive educational needs. States that the special classes may enroll students only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily. These requirements also apply to separate schooling, or other removal of individuals with exceptional needs from the regular educational environment. (EC 56364.2)
9. Requires the allowable new building area for the purpose of providing special classes and resource specialist program (RSP) facilities to be negotiated and approved, with any necessary assistance to be provided by the Special Education Division of the CDE. Also requires the square footage allowances to be computed within the maximum square footage as set forth in a specified schedule. (EC 17047)

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill has been keyed a possible state-mandated local program by the Office of Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

Need for the bill. According to the author “Assembly Bill 560, the Supporting California’s Special Educators Act, ensures that students with diverse learning needs receive the individualized attention they deserve, as well as fostering an environment that supports our educators. Smaller class sizes will help enhance the quality of education for students, improve educational outcomes, and reduce the strain on our educational workforce. AB 560 will have a profoundly positive impact on both special educators and the students they serve.”

Initial assessments conducted by RSP teachers. This bill requires LEAs to take all reasonable steps to distribute workload associated with initial assessments across all resource specialists employed by the LEA in an equal manner, unless otherwise collectively bargained.

Current law establishes a caseload limit of 28 students for resource specialists. Additionally, resource specialists conduct initial assessments to determine whether students qualify for special education services. As initial assessments are not included in the caseload limit under current law, the distribution of this workload is typically determined through collective bargaining. One school district’s contract, for example, entitles resource specialists to up to eight hours of additional compensation per initial assessment conducted.

Adult-to-student ratios in special day classes. This bill requires, on or before July 1, 2027, the SPI to establish a maximum recommended adult-to-student staffing ratio for special day classes for students ages 3 to 22, and post this recommendation on the CDE website.

This bill also requires the SPI to take numerous factors into consideration when making this recommendation, including the varying needs of students depending upon their support needs, their ages, and instructional settings, as well as constraints such as workforce and facility needs, and conditions in small and rural LEAs. Finally, the SPI would have to take into account the effects of this policy on the education of students in inclusive settings.

Current law authorizes school districts to place students in special day classes that serve students with similar and more intensive educational needs, only when the nature or severity of the disability of the individual with exceptional needs is such that education in the regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services, including curriculum modification and behavioral support, cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

Unlike for grades K-3, there is no class size or adult-to-student recommended ratio for special day classes. Each LEA or SELPA sets limits through collective bargaining. For example, one SELPA’s plan lists ratios ranging from 1:10 for classes serving students with mild to moderate support needs, to 1:3 for classes serving students with extensive support needs. When certain total enrollments are reached, the process of opening a new class is explored. For preschool special day classes, a ratio of 1:5 is required, pursuant to existing law.

It is unclear how many states have adult-to-student ratio requirements for special day classes, but New York state regulations establish a maximum class size of 15 students, or 12 students in a state-operated or state-supported school, with specified exceptions.

Current school facilities law establishes loading standards for special day classes. Current law establishes, for purposes of the School Facility Program, loading standards for special day classes, as shown in the chart on this page. These standards do not govern actual enrollment in special day classes, and may or may represent appropriate class sizes for instructional purposes. The Committee may wish to consider the need to review this provision of law to ensure that it does not serve as an impediment to ensuring that students are educated in the LRE.

Arguments in support. The California Federation of Teachers writes, “The ability of our members to properly serve [students with IEPs is] often limited by underfunding, understaffing, and an overall unwillingness of our education infrastructure to treat the needs of exceptional students with the respect they deserve. We have heard countless stories of special day classes—those focusing solely on special education students—being eliminated, students with relatively severe disabilities being placed in crowded general education environments that clearly violate IEPs, and other harmful outcomes that at best limit the ability of these students to learn and at worst jeopardize their safety.

Our members who conduct initial assessments of students who may benefit from an IEP also report that this critically important—but very time-consuming—work is often not factored into their existing work load, forcing them into the impossible position into somehow doing multiple jobs at once at the expense of their own mental and even physical health. This highly concerning state of affairs also harms the student’s right to an adequate IEP and further degrades educational quality. It also goes without saying that this situation contributes to burnout and severely complicates our ability to recruit and retain these essential workers.

AB 560 (Addis) approaches this problem by directing the California Department of Education to implement special day class size limits that would, if implemented, guarantee adequate attention to exceptional students and a reasonable workload for workers. Not only will this present a major step toward the quality of education the students deserve, it’s also critically important for their safety and mental well-being.”

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Teachers Association
California Federation of Teachers

48 individuals

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087