HB 1734
In CommitteeHouse
Outdoor learning grants
Concerning outdoor learning grants to expand and improve the delivery of outdoor learning opportunities.
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 new state grant program to help expand and upgrade outdoor learning facilities—like cabins, bathrooms, and kitchens—so more public school students, especially those from underserved communities, can participate in outdoor education. It builds on existing outdoor school efforts by focusing on infrastructure improvements to increase capacity and accessibility.
- Creates a new competitive grant program for expanding or improving outdoor learning facilities (e.g., building new beds, renovating kitchens/bathrooms, weatherizing buildings to extend operating seasons).
- Grants are available to federally recognized tribes, local governments, state/federal agencies, and nonprofits that operate or manage outdoor learning sites.
- Projects must show how they increase student participation—especially for students from underserved communities—or remove barriers to access.
- Grantees must maintain grant-funded facilities for a set period and use them only for outdoor education; failure to comply may require repayment with interest based on state bond rates.
- Starting in the 2027–2029 fiscal biennium, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) will submit a prioritized list of recommended projects—including funding amounts and matching nonstate funds—to the governor and legislature as part of the capital budget request.
Who is affected
- Public school districts — School districts can apply for grants to support outdoor education programs, especially those in underserved areas; may benefit from improved access to outdoor learning sites through expanded facility capacity.
- Outdoor education facility operators and landowners — Tribes, local governments, state and federal agencies, and nonprofits may apply for grants to build, expand, or upgrade outdoor learning facilities used for school programs.
- K–12 public school students — Public school students, especially those from historically underserved communities, gain increased access to hands-on outdoor science and career-connected learning experiences.
- State government agencies (e.g., OSPI) — State agencies like the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) will manage the grant program, review applications, and report on recommended projects.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The grant program directly funds infrastructure upgrades (e.g., beds, kitchens, weatherization) that expand capacity and extend operating seasons—enabling more public school students, especially those from underserved communities, to access outdoor science and career-connected learning, which research shows improves STEM engagement and academic outcomes.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(2), Sec. 2(3)By requiring grantees to maintain facilities and use them exclusively for outdoor education, the bill promotes long-term program sustainability and safety through consistent oversight—reducing risks associated with under-maintained or repurposed facilities.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4), Sec. 2(6)(a)-(b)The requirement that grantees document nonstate funding (e.g., local matching funds, in-kind support, private donations) leverages additional community investment and ensures projects reflect local priorities—strengthening public-private partnerships and local capacity.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(5)The focus on expanding facility capacity and removing barriers specifically for underserved students aligns with the legislature’s stated goal of advancing equity in science education—potentially increasing participation among low-income, rural, and historically excluded student populations.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(2)Weatherization and infrastructure upgrades may create short-term construction and skilled trades jobs—particularly benefiting local contractors and tradesworkers in rural and small communities where many outdoor education sites are located.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(3)
Potential Concerns (4)
The bill requires OSPI to submit a prioritized list of recommended projects to the governor and legislature as part of the capital budget request, but does not guarantee funding—leaving project approval and funding levels subject to future political decisions, creating uncertainty for local governments and nonprofits seeking long-term infrastructure planning.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(5)The repayment clause—requiring grantees to repay grants with interest at the state bond rate if they fail to comply with facility use or maintenance requirements—could impose financial risk on small nonprofits or tribal entities with limited cash reserves, potentially deterring participation despite good-faith operational challenges.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(6)(c)While the bill prioritizes projects that increase participation or remove barriers for underserved students, it does not mandate that grantees serve a minimum number of such students or track outcomes by demographic subgroup—limiting accountability for equity goals.
EducationRef: Sec. 2(2)The competitive grant process may disproportionately favor larger, more experienced organizations (e.g., state agencies, well-established nonprofits) over smaller local governments or tribal entities with fewer grant-writing resources, potentially widening existing capacity gaps.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(1)
Who Is Most Affected
School districts—especially those in rural, low-income, or high-need areas—may benefit significantly by gaining access to expanded or upgraded outdoor education sites, reducing transportation/logistical barriers, and increasing student participation. However, districts must still compete for grants and provide matching funds, which may be challenging for cash-strapped districts.
Nonprofits and tribal entities operating outdoor education sites stand to gain critical infrastructure upgrades, but face competitive application hurdles and repayment risk if they cannot maintain facilities long-term. Smaller organizations may struggle with matching fund requirements, while larger, well-resourced nonprofits are better positioned to benefit.
K–12 students—particularly those from underserved communities—gain direct access to high-quality outdoor science and career-connected learning, which research links to improved academic engagement, mental health, and career readiness. However, access depends on district participation and transportation logistics, which may still exclude some students.
OSPI gains expanded authority and responsibility for managing a new capital grant program, increasing its role in equity-focused infrastructure investment. However, the agency’s success hinges on future legislative funding and political support, and it bears the burden of oversight and repayment enforcement.
Local governments (counties, cities, special districts) may apply for grants to upgrade regional outdoor education facilities, potentially expanding educational access and creating local jobs. However, smaller municipalities may lack staff or expertise to navigate the competitive process or meet matching fund requirements.