Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) · 6 active : 2 Republicans, 4 Democrats
Latest action: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 566.
Fostering Learning and Excellence in Charter Schools Act or the FLEX Act
This bill expands and revises the Charter Schools Program (CSP), including by expanding the allowable uses of CSP funds.
Current law authorizes competitive grants to state entities (e.g., state educational agencies and state charter school boards) and, through them, subgrants to eligible applicants (i.e., charter school developers) to enable them to open and prepare for the operation of a new charter school or replicate or expand an existing high-quality charter school.
The bill allows subgrants to also be used for adding or expanding programs or other offerings at these schools, such as through the adoption of new academic programs or delivery models, personalized learning, or a new curricular approach. New offerings must enable additional students to enroll in and benefit from the school.
Eligible applicants may also use CSP funds for activities such as
hiring and compensating teachers and other school staff (currently, this may only occur during the planning period);
carrying out necessary renovations, upgrades, or facility repairs, or acquiring portable classrooms; and
providing transportation to students (currently, only one-time, start-up transportation costs are permitted).
Eligible applicants may request and receive advance payments of subgrants.
Among other requirements, the Department of Education must (1) use CSP funds for additional activities (e.g., increasing the number of available seats in charter schools that serve rural students and students with disabilities), and (2) consult with charter school operators prior to issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking relevant to charter schools.
Members fall into . 3 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, , and the . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has.
Loading similar votes
These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 7 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 3 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Similar votes count toward swing-v3 in the House: total similarity weight 21.0 (needs 5.0).
