House Bill 1310 amends RCW 28A.150.390, 28A.150.560, and 28A.150.392, adds a new section to chapter 28A.155 RCW, creates a new section, and takes effect September 1, 2025. The bill changes special education funding formulas and procedures: it specifies excess cost allocations with stated multipliers (ages 3–5: base × 1.6381; K–12 students in general education 80%+ of day: base × 1.5289; K–12 students in general education <80% of day: base × 1.447), defines "base allocation," and authorizes OSPI to reserve up to 0.005 of funding generated under excess cost allocation for statewide special education activities. It declares intent to remove the special education enrollment cap, lower the threshold for safety net funds, and increase tiered multipliers. The bill creates a new statewide OSPI duty to provide specified activities (data review for disproportionate identification consistent with IDEA, technical assistance, optional professional development and shared IEP tools) and requires annual reporting to the legislature by December 1, with 2025 and 2026 reports addressing the impact of removing the enrollment cap. It requires OSPI to develop a proration and cost-accounting method so general apportionment funding for students educated primarily in alternative settings is prorated to special education before calculating excess costs, and to report accounting of such prorated allocations to the legislature by January 1, 2024, and then every odd-numbered January 1. The bill revises safety net procedures and eligibility: state safety net awards are limited to demonstrated excess special education costs, the oversight committee must consider extraordinary high-cost individual student needs (including residential and juvenile education settings), safety net awards for high-need students in 2025–26 are available when IEP costs exceed 1.5 times the average per-pupil expenditure (per 20 U.S.C. §7801), indirect costs are capped at the federal restricted indirect cost rate plus one percent, awards must be adjusted for Medicaid billing rates and unresolved audit exceptions, and OSPI must adopt rules, provide technical assistance, survey districts (with deadlines for small-district survey by Dec. 1, 2024, and a simplified standardized application by Dec. 1, 2025), and distribute certain awards quarterly beginning 2025–26. The safety net oversight committee’s composition and many procedural safeguards are specified. Some text and context are incomplete in the provided extracts: a subsection ends mid-sentence and some cross-referenced subsection content, full definitions (including the OSPI definition of “disproportionate identification”), and the complete structure of subsection (2) are not included here, so precise application of some eligibility and procedural provisions cannot be fully determined from these excerpts.

If enacted, the bill would likely increase state funding for students who receive special education by removing the enrollment cap, using higher tiered multipliers to calculate excess cost allocations, and lowering the threshold for qualifying as a high‑need student (to IEP costs exceeding 1.5 times the federal average per‑pupil expenditure beginning 2025‑26). Districts with high‑cost special education students — including those placing students in residential or out‑of‑state nonpublic programs — will have improved access to safety net awards, faster payments in some continuing cases, and a promise of a simplified, standardized safety net application by December 1, 2025; however, awards will still require documented expenditures, must account for Medicaid billing rates, and can be reduced for unresolved audit findings or material application errors. The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction will take on new responsibilities and modest ongoing costs: developing and reporting proration and accounting methods, reserving up to 0.5% of special education excess cost funding for statewide activities (reviews, technical assistance, professional development, and IEP tools), producing regular reports to the legislature, conducting district surveys (beginning with a small‑district survey by December 1, 2024), and adopting rules in consultation with OFM and fiscal committees. Some implementation details that will shape the real impact — such as the uniform proration percentage OSPI may set and the OSPI definition of “disproportionate identification” — are left to OSPI rulemaking, so exact funding shifts and administrative burdens remain partly uncertain.