Transcript AUSD Special Education

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
•
•
•

IDEA (1997)—Reduced
funding restrictions
•

Free Appropriate Public
Education (FAPE)
Least Restrictive
Environment (LRE)
IEP/Parent Rights
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
•
Office of Administrative Hearings
•
•
•


Information with address given in annual parents’ rights
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
Specialized
Programs
Added preschool
autism class
(100,000)
Staffing for
specialized
instruction
Support to
Intervention
1.6 FTE TSA
(neutral due to
school closure)
Administrative
Unit
.6 FTE NPS
Psych.
(60,000)
07-08
08-09
Cost Goal
Add autism class
to K-5 level
(100,000)
AUSD NPS Day
Treatment
program
(Unknown)
Mitigate disability
impact. Reduce
litigation and
NPS.
Educational
specialist K-5
(70,000)
?
Reduce need for
restrictive
placements.
1.0 FTE TSA
(70,000)
More students in
gen ed./LRE
Compliant IEPs
Add Infant unit
pending infant
grant
requirements
Support unified
ed. effort/reduce
NPS & litigation.
Eliminate Prog
Specialist/Add
Coordinators
(10,000)
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