Spotlight Focuses on State of Special Education in the SMMUSD

• Consultants’ Report Looks at All Facets of Programs that Have Come under Fire

BY NICOLE KLIEST

In a recent report by Lou Barber and Associates, an independent evaluation was conducted of the special education program operated by the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District.
Major issues were evaluated in the report, such as placement options, collaboration with the Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), funding, personnel, confidentiality clauses, and written policies.
The study was conducted during the months of December 2007 through March 2008. After an initial interview with Superintendent Dianne Talarico, it was determined that a series of interviews with parents, teaching staff, principals, ancillary and district office staff would be held.
The findings of the report were reviewed with the superintendent and members of her staff. Recommendations the district were asked to consider were based on the information received and they dealt with maximizing resources and enhancing the provision of quality education services to students at cost effective levels.
The Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District provides special education services in conjunction with SELPA in order to assure access to special education programs and services for those with exceptional needs.
The district is responsible for the provision of all special education programs and services as specified under the Individuals with Disability Education Act, (IDEA) and the California Master Plan for Special Education.
The report indicates that the district during the last two decades has, in essence, been stretched thin while trying to implement the state law (Master Plan for Special Education), avoid violating the federal law (P.L. 94-142 Disability Education Act) and at the same time attempting to provide a quality education program for all students, as well as those in special education.
The report provides a 27-item set of recommendations for the district’s consideration that relate to all the issues discussed within the report itself.
In regard to settlement agreements with confidentiality clauses, the report suggests a dramatic reduction. If in the case this type of settlement is utilized, it is suggested that communication to school staff of the education services provided to the student is pertinent. It also suggests this information be included in the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP).
Another recommendation the authors make is that the district should consider how to present information to parents to showcase existing services and the quality of the services being provided by staff in meeting the needs of all students.
With staffing, it was suggested that since the district’s staffing levels appear higher than statewide averages, areas of employment, including psychologists, special education administrators, elementary SDC teachers, elementary RSP, and speech and language specialists, should be reviewed in detail.
The report indicates this should help to determine if reductions and/or merging of programs is possible in order to reduce the general fund contribution to special education.
Finally, a cost recommendation was made that stated the budget development process for the district is in need of incorporating a process whereby all existing resources are re-examined, including current student populations and staffing levels, rather than beginning the process at current levels.
Several other recommendations were made that dealt with issues previously discussed and were included in the report as an offer for consideration by the district.