SHB 1289
In CommitteeHouse
Public school survey info.
Gathering survey information to improve the public school system.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill creates a voluntary survey for parents and guardians who transfer or withdraw their children from public schools, to help schools and the state understand why families leave and how to improve services. It also clarifies that districts may ask—but not require—families to complete an optional exit interview when a student leaves.
- Creates a voluntary online survey for parents/guardians who transfer or withdraw their children from public schools (e.g., to private schools or home-based instruction), to be operated by the Washington School Information Processing Cooperative (WSIPC).
- The survey must be operational by September 1, 2025, and use the statewide student identifier to link responses to specific students while maintaining confidentiality.
- Schools are encouraged (but not required) to share the survey link with families when a transfer or withdrawal request is made.
- Starting December 1, 2026, WSIPC must issue annual district-level and statewide summaries of survey data to schools, districts, and the legislature.
- Adds a new subsection to existing law (RCW 28A.225.220) allowing districts to request an optional exit interview or questionnaire (but not require it) when a student transfers out.
- Requires all survey and interview data to comply with federal and state student privacy laws (e.g., FERPA).
Who is affected
- Parents and guardians of public school students — Parents and guardians who transfer or withdraw their children from public schools may be invited (but not required) to complete a voluntary survey explaining their reasons, and schools may offer optional exit interviews.
- Public schools and school districts — Will receive annual summary reports of survey data related to their district(s), and may use the data to improve programs and services.
- State legislators (especially education and fiscal committees) — Will receive annual statewide and district-level summaries of survey data to inform policy decisions and budget planning.
- Washington School Information Processing Cooperative (WSIPC) — Will develop, maintain, and distribute the survey tool and annual reports, while ensuring student data privacy compliance.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (3)
The survey will provide districts and the state with actionable, real-world data on why families leave public schools—especially those who exit for reasons not captured in standard enrollment tracking (e.g., dissatisfaction with curriculum, lack of culturally responsive teaching, or unmet special education needs)—enabling targeted program improvements that benefit remaining students.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(b), Sec. 1(4)(a)(i)Annual statewide and district-level reports will increase transparency and accountability, empowering parents, advocates, and legislators to identify inequities (e.g., disproportionate exits by race, disability status, or language group) and push for equitable resource allocation.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(a)(ii), Sec. 1(4)(b)Allowing—but not requiring—exit interviews gives districts a low-barrier tool to gather qualitative feedback from departing families, potentially uncovering nuanced concerns (e.g., social-emotional climate, teacher-student mismatch) that standardized metrics miss.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(5)
Potential Concerns (3)
Voluntary surveys and optional exit interviews may yield low response rates, especially from families who left due to safety concerns (e.g., bullying, discrimination, or inadequate support for students with disabilities), limiting the data’s usefulness for identifying systemic safety issues.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 1(3), Sec. 2(5)Use of the statewide student identifier to link survey responses to specific students—even in anonymized aggregate reports—creates potential re-identification risks, especially in small districts or for rare exit reasons (e.g., religious exemptions, LGBTQ+ family transitions), chilling participation and undermining true confidentiality.
Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 1(5), Sec. 1(1)(b)While no new funding is allocated, implementation of the survey system and annual reporting will require staff time and technical resources from WSIPC and school districts, potentially diverting有限 resources from direct instructional support—especially in under-resourced districts.
Local GovernmentRef: Fiscal Impact section
Who Is Most Affected
Families who leave public schools for reasons tied to unmet needs (e.g., special education, racial bias, safety) may benefit if the data leads to systemic improvements—but may be deterred from participating due to privacy concerns or distrust in government data use.
Districts, especially those with high exit rates or serving marginalized populations, could use the data to diagnose problems and justify resource requests—but may face political pressure if data reveals systemic failures or inequities.
Legislators gain evidence-based insights to inform education policy and budget decisions, particularly around equity and school choice—but may face pressure to act on findings that highlight underfunding or policy gaps.
WSIPC gains expanded responsibility and visibility as a data steward, but must invest in privacy safeguards and outreach to ensure high-quality participation—failure to do so could erode trust in state data systems.
Families who exit due to dissatisfaction may be underrepresented in the survey if they distrust the system or fear retaliation—limiting the data’s ability to reflect the full scope of concerns, especially among low-income, immigrant, or historically marginalized communities.