AUSD Special Education

2006 FCMAT Plus

January 30, 2007

History of Special Education Mandates

Prior to 1975 no mandate for educating students with disabilities• Many students received

no public education

• Parents not included

• Programs added or cut depending on funding

Litigation began in late 60’s and early 70’s

Federal courts deemed education a civil right for all, regardless of ability.

PL94-142, (1975)—separate under-funding• Free Appropriate Public

Education (FAPE)• Least Restrictive

Environment (LRE)• IEP/Parent Rights

IDEA (1997)—Reduced funding restrictions• Progress in gen. ed. focus

IDEIA (2004)—Specialized Instruction• Added Ed Benefit• RTI & Behavior supports

Litigation continues to drive mandates

Cases begin at state level with OAH• Information with address given in annual parents’ rights

Office of Administrative Hearings• 6/1/05 to 6/30/06: CA cases opened: 4,041

• 6/1/05 to 6/30/06: AUSD cases opened: 5• FCMAT Report: AUSD cost $216,600 for 05-06

• 6/1/05 to 6/30/06: NR SELPA cases opened: 22 Appeal process through federal courts Landmark Decisions

• Rowley (1982)

• Holland (1994)

NCLB & IDEA 2004 INTERFACE

Accountability Highly qualified

teachers Use of research

validated reading instruction

All students become proficient

AYP for special ed. SDC staff teaching

core subjects? Response to

Intervention (RTI) & specialized instruction

Educational Benefit

FCMAT Report Overview Requested during 05-06 due to increasing

• Litigation costs and parent complaints• NPS and NPA services• Staffing problems and low staff morale

Focused on 7 areas/113 recommendations• Program Efficiency and Delivery• Staffing• Transportation• Accounting Processes• NPS and NPA Services• Legal Costs• SELPA Reorganization

FCMAT IMPLEMENTATION to MAXIMIZE EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES while containing costs

Development of one, unified educational system

Communication systems with staff and parents

Implementation of specialized instruction to ensure educational benefit

Response to specialized populations Compliance Systems

Development of one, unified educational system Dual Structure

• General education delivers instruction in heterogeneous settings using traditional methods

• Students needing intervention referred to SST.

• Students not “qualifying” receive little or no intervention.

• Special Ed. provides “services” through RSP, SDC & Full Inclusion, NPS structures.

Unified Structure• General education has

structures & instructional tools to address students with intensive needs

• Non-identified students referred for SST after interventions.

• Specialized instruction is provided in conjunction with general education

• Special Ed students receive specialized instruction as needed/supports provided to maintain LRE.

Communication Systems with Staff and Parents Develop, implement, disseminate clear policies

and procedures. Develop family friendly brochures outlining

programs options and user friendly AUSD resolution practices.

Institute regular district special education information events for families.

Develop district special education website access for parents and staff.

Establish District Advisory Committee

Implementation of Specialized Instruction=Educational Benefit

Staff development (including coaching) in research validated instructional tools.

Administrative support for consistent implementation.

Recruitment and support for staff On-going monitoring and support for IEP

development & adjustment based on assessment & educational benefit.

Response to Specialized Populations

Maintain staff knowledge & implementation of research validated practices and structures.

Develop collaborative relationships with NPA and NPS to support AUSD programs.

Implement rigorous curriculum for non-diploma track high school students

Build collaborative structures to support 18-22 year old students.

Compliance Systems

Special Education Information System (SEIS)…web based IEP program• Provides real time caseload reports

• Flags omissions/prevents final submission Regular Staff Development Administrative Unit supports site

administrative efforts for site IEP teams Advisory Committee oversight

Recommendations for Implementation

Item 06-07 07-08 08-09 Cost Goal

Specialized Programs

Added preschool autism class

(100,000)

Add autism class to K-5 level

(100,000)

AUSD NPS Day Treatment program

(Unknown)

Mitigate disability impact. Reduce litigation and NPS.

Staffing for specialized instruction

Educational specialist K-5

(70,000)

? Reduce need for restrictive placements.

Support to Intervention

1.6 FTE TSA

(neutral due to school closure)

1.0 FTE TSA

(70,000)

More students in gen ed./LRE

Compliant IEPs

Administrative Unit

.6 FTE NPS Psych.

(60,000)

Eliminate Prog Specialist/Add Coordinators

(10,000)

Add Infant unit pending infant

grant requirements

Support unified ed. effort/reduce NPS & litigation.

A Final Reality Check

What does FREE mean in FAPE? Unknown factors

• Students moving in with existing IEPs requiring additional staffing/placements.

• Disability bulge not currently addressed

• Students with Asperger’s Syndrome & NLD

Speed of implementation of General Ed. structures and tools for intervention

Needs of 18-22 year old population