. >> my other main point- question, had to do with this pro rata salary attribution. very curious to hear what the view is on how we make that happen. it sounds incredibly difficult. >> this is under subsection where dr.? >> yes >> if you have individuals who are essentially in-house were doing activities that could count towards a qualifying threshold, the developing public relations materials during outreach, doing reports, urging others to communicate, the first question was, should those completely be exempt because their in-house activities are not making a payment. this approach suggests they should be treated the same. whether you make a payment for in-house services were making a payment for the next consultant or organization to do that work. the second question is to when you count toward the $2500,-and this is what i was getting a earlier, -does the counting toward $2500 tied to a specific matter of legislative or administrative action or is it $2500 and activities spent towards any and all legislative and administrative matters? our first take was it appea

we're cacaring the pro rata pirates live and i will close with j jen leigh and john holloway is s our private rereporter in the street. . cover chararge the 2:30 saturday y and streaming live on our website at wfla.com. >>> the florida standards s assessment tesest got off to a rocky start and d still faced a lot of criticisism. >> a lawmaker wantnts to use national s standardized test and said. story today. >> reporter: the wasn't much of a honeymoon phase e for ththe florida a standards assessment nonow that one lawmaker wants to give schoolsls the options to use national tesest said. senator don gagaetz has a bill that allows schools to say goodbye toto the fsa in favor of national standardized test like ththe azt or sat. it doesn't dodo away with testing likeke some credits would like to see e what could reduce the amount of test students take. >> last time testing and more time teaching and more vavalidated assessment. nationally respepected tests and awaway frankly for stududents to be able to use those results fofor college and career readadiness in a way that i think is advant

. >> my other main point- question, had to do with this pro rata salary attribution. very curious to hear what the view is on how we make that happen. it sounds incredibly difficult. >> this is under subsection where dr.? >> yes >> if you have individuals who are essentially in-house were doing activities that could count towards a qualifying threshold, the developing public relations materials during outreach, doing reports, urging others to communicate, the first question was, should those completely be exempt because their in-house activities are not making a payment. this approach suggests they should be treated the same. whether you make a payment for in-house services were making a payment for the next consultant or organization to do that work. the second question is to when you count toward the $2500,-and this is what i was getting a earlier, -does the counting toward $2500 tied to a specific matter of legislative or administrative action or is it $2500 and activities spent towards any and all legislative and administrative matters? our first take was it appea

the awards of contracts it's distributed on a fairly -- i wouldn't say equitable basis, but on a pro rata basis one should expect given the availability of firms. that is what is attempted with this particular slide. with that said, i'm going to go ahead and have kashicka walk you through the remaining slides and i'll be back up to give you additional color. the next slide is an overall summary from july 2015 to december 2015. and details the number of dollars towards the 50% goal and details professional services at 105.4 million and construction and supplies at $485.1 million. and next graph, so you can see the percentage and any fluctuations and changes and professional services continued to exceed the sbe goal and construction and supplies is 36.5%, very slight change from over the course, but again, given some of the fluctuations in the market, this was to be expected and is not really alarming to us. >> the next slide speaks to the prior commitments and in terms of payment information, we have done an analysis in terms of the systems. their collection of payment information and how

the awards of contracts it's distributed on a fairly -- i wouldn't say equitable basis, but on a pro rata one should expect given the availability of firms. that is what is attempted with this particular slide. with that said, i'm going to go ahead and have kashicka walk you through the remaining slides and i'll be back up to give you additional color. the next slide is an overall summary from july 2015 to december 2015. and details the number of dollars towards the 50% goal and details professional services at 105.4 million and construction and supplies at $485.1 million. and next graph, so you can see the percentage and any fluctuations and changes and professional services continued to exceed the sbe goal and construction and supplies is 36.5%, very slight change from over the course, but again, given some of the fluctuations in the market, this was to be expected and is not really alarming to us. >> the next slide speaks to the prior commitments and in terms of payment information, we have done an analysis in terms of the systems. their collection of payment information and how that i

not just at the end of ten years, as happens now, but year by year, pro rata. not just if they stay in the same job, but if they move from one job to another, or even have to move homes across state lines, expanding the availability of public service recognition and credit to reduce college debt is much in the spirit of the g.i. bill. and i hope that we will move forward to expand the availability of debt recognition and reduction for public service. i also hope that when our needier students receive assistance for room and board when they go to college, that they not be taxed on that assistance. that happens now. why should they be taxed on the room and board they need and that assistance to go to college? that's wrong. and scandalously and outrageously, it is wrong that the united states government makes money off the backs of our students. we should be investing, investing in one of the greatest assets in a democracy. people who want to raise their skills and talents and education so they can better serve not just in the public sector, but in the business wo