SB 5120
In CommitteeSenate
Learning assistance program
Expanding the learning assistance program.
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 expands Washington’s learning assistance program to provide more targeted supplemental instruction for students not meeting academic standards, especially in high-poverty schools, and updates the state’s basic education funding formula to improve transparency, reflect actual classroom staffing, and adjust for inflation. It also adds new reporting requirements and changes how poverty-based funding is calculated.
- Expands the learning assistance program to provide supplemental instruction for students not meeting academic standards, with new funding based on school poverty levels starting in 2026–27 using a tiered system (Tier 1: ≥70% free/reduced-price meal eligibility, Tier 2: 50–69.9%, Tier 3: 30–49.9%).
- Increases transparency by requiring the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to publish per-pupil allocations for multiple programs (including learning assistance) on its website, and requiring school districts to link to that report.
- Updates the funding formula to reflect actual class sizes in grades K–3 (up to the funded level), and adds enhanced funding for laboratory science classes in high schools.
- Requires school districts to use increased allocations for paraeducators, office support, and noninstructional aides to support increased staffing, prevent layoffs, or raise salaries in the 2024–25 school year.
- Adjusts eligibility for high-poverty school funding for 2024–25 and 2025–26 to include schools that met the 50% threshold in prior years or participate in the USDA Community Eligibility Provision.
Who is affected
- School districts — School districts receive updated funding formulas and requirements for how learning assistance funds can be used, including transparency reporting and staffing flexibility.
- Students struggling academically — Students in grades K–12 who are not meeting academic standards may receive additional instruction and support through expanded learning assistance programs, especially in high-poverty schools.
- School support staff — Paraeducators, office support staff, and other noninstructional staff may benefit from increased funding targeted to prevent layoffs or increase salaries in the 2024–25 school year.
- Families in high-poverty communities — Families and students in high-poverty schools may gain access to more intensive supplemental instruction based on new tiered eligibility criteria starting in 2026–27.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The expansion of the learning assistance program with a new tiered funding model starting in 2026–27—targeting schools with ≥30% free/reduced-price meal eligibility—will direct additional instructional time (0.4–2.2 hours/week) to students in high-poverty schools who are most likely to fall behind academically, improving access to targeted academic support.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(10)(a)(ii)(C)(1)-(3)The requirement that districts use increased allocations for paraeducators, office support, and noninstructional aides in 2024–25 to support increased staffing, prevent layoffs, or raise salaries directly benefits low-wage support staff—many of whom earn under $20/hour—and helps stabilize employment in districts facing budget pressures.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(5)(c)Mandating that OSPI publish per-pupil allocations for key programs (learning assistance, special education, etc.) and requiring districts to link to that report improves transparency for families—especially those in low-income or linguistically diverse communities—allowing them to compare district spending and hold schools accountable.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(b)The enhanced funding for laboratory science classes (class size target 19.98, course factor 0.0833) improves access to hands-on STEM learning in high schools, which is especially beneficial for students in under-resourced schools that may lack lab equipment and qualified instructors—though the benefit is modest in scale.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(a)(ii)The $21 per-pupil increase for materials, supplies, and operating costs—indexed to inflation—helps offset rising costs for textbooks, technology, and classroom supplies, directly benefiting students by improving learning conditions and reducing teacher out-of-pocket spending.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(8)(c)
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill imposes new transparency reporting requirements on school districts to link to the OSPI per-pupil allocations report on their websites and mandates that districts report how increased allocations for paraeducators and support staff are used, increasing administrative burden without providing new dedicated funding for compliance.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(2)(b)The requirement that districts use increased allocations for paraeducators, office support, and noninstructional aides specifically in 2024–25 to support increased staffing, prevent layoffs, or raise salaries may incentivize districts to hire new staff rather than retain existing staff, potentially leading to inconsistent staffing and reduced continuity of support for students—though it helps some support staff, the mandate is narrow and time-bound, limiting broad labor-market impact.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(5)(c)The tiered high-poverty funding model (Tier 1: ≥70% FRL, Tier 2: 50–69.9%, Tier 3: 30–49.9%) begins in 2026–27, but the allocation per week of instruction is modest (0.4–2.2 hours), and the class size remains at 15 students per teacher—limiting the scale of academic intervention, especially for students with significant learning gaps or disabilities who need more intensive, sustained support.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(10)(a)(ii)(C)(1)-(3)The requirement that K–3 class size funding be provided only to the extent of a district’s *actual* class size—up to the funded level—means districts that have already reduced class sizes below the target (e.g., 17:1) receive no additional funding, while those with larger classes may benefit—but this also disincentivizes districts from going below funded thresholds, potentially locking in higher class sizes in practice.
EducationRef: Sec. 1(4)(b)(i)The rule requiring districts to use additional funding for social-emotional support staff (e.g., nurses, counselors, psychologists) only to the extent of *demonstrated actual ratios* may disadvantage districts with existing staffing shortfalls, as they cannot access funding to *increase* staffing beyond current levels—effectively codifying understaffing rather than remedying it.
HealthcareLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(5)(b)(i)
Who Is Most Affected
Families in high-poverty communities benefit significantly: students gain access to more intensive supplemental instruction in schools with ≥30% FRL eligibility, and parents benefit from increased transparency in per-pupil spending. Support staff in these schools also benefit from job stability and potential wage increases.
Paraeducators, office support staff, and other noninstructional staff—especially those earning near minimum wage—benefit from the 2024–25 mandate to use increased funding to prevent layoffs or raise salaries. However, the benefit is time-limited and does not guarantee long-term wage growth or improved benefits.
Students struggling academically, especially in high-poverty schools, gain access to more targeted instruction (up to 2.2 hours/week in Tier 1 schools), but the intervention remains limited in scope (15:1 class size) and may not reach students with significant learning disabilities or trauma without additional staffing or wraparound services.
School districts gain more transparent and inflation-adjusted funding formulas, but must absorb new administrative burdens (e.g., reporting, data collection on paraeducator use). Districts in high-poverty areas benefit from targeted supplemental funding, but districts below the 30% FRL threshold receive no additional learning assistance funding.