Strategic Plan Status UpdateSpecial Education Program Evaluation

February 10, 2020

2

Goal 2: Student Experiences

Objective: A program evaluation of our current service delivery model for students with disabilities will be conducted by the end of the 2018-19 school year. Approved recommendations will be implemented in subsequent years.

3

Program Evaluation Timeline

January–March 2019: Literature review and instrument development phase

March – November 2019: Data collection and analysis phase

November – December 2019: Draft report submitted for review and feedback

January - February 2020: Final report submitted and Board Presentation

4

Presented by Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.

to the York County School Division

February 10, 2020

Special Education Program Evaluation

Agenda

5

Introduction

Parent Insights and Satisfaction

Staff Input

Organization and Management

Program Implementation

Behavior Programs

Questions

6

Introduction

Gibson Consulting Group

7

Consulting and Research firm exclusively dedicated to the K12 industry

Evaluated more than 75 special education programs nationwide

Based in Austin, Texas

15 employees, plus alliance partners

Selected in January 2019 through competitive procurement

Evaluation Team

8

Presenting:

― Greg Gibson, Project Director

― Keri Munkwitz, Senior Evaluation Consultant

― Dr. Jill Carle, Research Scientist

― Dr. Cindy Elsberry, Special Education Technical Specialist

Others Involved:

― Eric Booth, Senior Research Scientist

― Marshall Garland, Senior Quantitative Analyst

― Rex Long, Qualitative Data Analyst

Project Objective

9

To solicit feedback from program stakeholders and identify opportunities for improving programs and services to students with disabilities in YCSD.

Evaluation Questions

10

What is the quality of special education services in YCSD as evidenced by historical trends in student performance outcomes, program participation, and comparisons with similar schools and divisions?

Are YCSD’s special education programs and services appropriately organized, staffed, structured, and supported?

Are students effectively identified, evaluated, and placed in special education?

Are special education programs and services meeting the needs of students in YCSD?

To what extent are staff and parents satisfied with the continuum of services provided to special education students in YCSD?

Elements of Work

11

Literature Review of Best Practices and Strategies

Data Analysis and Benchmarking

Individualized Education Program (IEP) Review

Site Visit / School Visits / Classroom Observations

Staff Survey

Parent Survey and Phone Interviews

12

Parent Insights and Satisfaction

Parent Insights and Satisfaction

13

Online parent survey (1,561 sent, 20% response rate)

Phone interviews with hard-to-reach parents (n=34)

Four domains:

― Satisfaction with instructional services and IEP development

― Satisfaction with school environment and family communication

― Parent involvement

― Transportation services

Overall positive feedback across most domains

Parent Survey Results

14

71%

77%

79%

83%

84%

85%

87%

87%

87%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

School communicates regularly regarding child’s progress on IEP goals

IEP covers all appropriate aspects of child'sdevelopment

Had positive experiences at IEP meetings

Discussed how child would participate in stateassessments

Concerns/recommendations documented on IEP

Placement decisions made using data/input from IEPteam members

Team selects accommodations child needs

Staff conveyed sufficient knowledge of IEP process

Had thorough discussions of goals during IEPmeetings

IEP Development

Parent Survey Results

15

65%

67%

68%

80%

80%

89%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Teachers/staff at school effectively manageincidents of teasing/bullying

I am satisfied with the quality of specialeducation services my child receives

School ensures afterschool/extracurricularactivities are accessible

School provides my child with all IEP services

General education teachers implement all IEPaccommodations/modifications

Child spends an appropriate amount of time ingeneral education classes, given learning needs

Quality of Student Services Received

Parent Survey Results

16

Communication

72%

80%

81%

93%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Teachers/staff regularly share dataabout how child is doing

Referral/evaluation process for testingwas clear/easy

Teachers/staff encourage participationin decision-making process

Written information received is writtenin understandable way

Parent Survey Results

17

30%

34%

35%

58%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

School connects parents to organizationsthat serve parents of children w/

disabilities

School connects families to other familiesto provide information/mutual support

School offers parents training if they needhelp understanding child's curriculum

School gives parents help they need to play active role in child’s education

Accessibility of Resources

Recommendation

18

Help connect parents of students with disabilities with community resources to support them and help them fully engage in their child’s educational life.

19

Staff Input

Staff Survey Participants

20

Special Education Teachers

Non-Special Education Teachers

School Leaders

Para-educators

Related Service Providers

School Board Office Staff

Staff Survey Domains

21

Satisfaction with Special Education identification, placement, and service delivery

Specialized instruction and inclusion

Teaching supports and collaboration

Professional development

Job satisfaction and responsibilities

Organizational support

Staff Survey Results

22

1,610 online surveys sent; 67% response rate

Response rates similar to division population percentages

Level of satisfaction varied significantly across domains, employee groups, school types, and schools within a school type

Results woven into report observations where applicable

23

Organization and Management

Program Profile

24

YCSD serves 1,450 students with disabilities, representing 11.2% of total enrollment, below the state average of 13.2% and below most peers

9.7%10.6% 11.2%

12.5% 12.6% 13.0%13.8%

13.2%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

RockinghamCounty

Culpepper York County Albemarle Suffolk City FrederickCounty

FaquierCounty

2018-2019 State

Over the past 5 years, growth in students with disabilities (17.9%) has exceeded overall enrollment growth (2.1%)

Program Profile

25

Flat per-student spending on students with disabilities, and below available benchmarks

$10,957 $11,386 $11,335 $12,192 $11,676

$-

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018

Improvement Opportunities

26

Organization structure:

― 22 positions report to the Director, resulting in excessive involvement in transactional details

― Peer divisions show much lower span of control

― Program accountability (instruction, compliance, data analysis) not reflected on organizational chart

Improvement Opportunities

27

Level of Student Services Coordinator support across schools is inconsistent and focuses more on administrative than academic support

More special education para-educators (114) than teachers (103), inconsistent with what research suggests

Staffing formulas and guidelines not sufficiently based on student needs (service hours) or division-established caseloads

Improvement Opportunities

28

Incomplete and/or outdated procedures and job descriptions

Insufficient data validation and analysis

Improvement Opportunities

29

Lower Medicaid Reimbursement Revenue per student than

available benchmarks

$243

$109

$122

$10

$96

$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300

Suffolk City

Fauquier County

Culpeper County

Albemarle County

York County

Recommendations

30

Reorganize the Office of Student Services to achieve a reasonable span of control and a logical alignment of functions

Convert some para-educator positions to teacher positions to more significantly impact student learning

Establish targets for related services provider student-staff ratios and caseload maximums to ensure optimal staffing efficiency and effectiveness

Recommendations

31

Assign a dedicated staff resource to data analysis, data verification, and data entry training

Seek outside assistance to explore additional Medicaid Revenue opportunities

32

Program Implementation

Program Profile

33

YCSD is trending towards higher inclusion levels

Student achievement significantly higher than peer divisions and state average across all content areas, largely mirroring general education performance

Program Passing Rates

34

Graduation and Dropout Rates

35

Improvement Opportunities

36

RtI implementation fidelity and effectiveness

― Staff survey on effectiveness of RtI ranged from 33% to 80% agreement

70.837.1

7672.2

3561.5

53.164

75.933.3

65.168.8

80.443.3

73.555.6

77.572.7

66.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

The RtI process at my school is effective in addressing the needs of students who are experiencing difficultyin school.

Improvement Opportunities

37

Some components of IEPs do not meet best practice standards and quality is inconsistent across schools

― Measurable goals

― Well–written Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLAAFP)

― Annual revision timelines

― Mastery of goals and objectives

Improvement Opportunities

38

Staff survey showed wide variations in agreement with consistency of placement decision across schools

26.938.539.3

41.750

54.555.656.3

63.673.9

59.472.7

76.277.5

5061.8

71.483.9

85

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Placement decisions are made consistently across IEP teams and schools.

Improvement Opportunities

39

Inclusion:

― General education classes have high percentage of high-need students

― In-classroom segregation of students with disabilities

― Over-utilization of whole group instruction

― Limited use of instructional technology to differentiate instruction

― Classroom observations not reflective of training efforts

Recommendations

40

Update RtI standard operating procedures and centrally monitor school-level RtI data

Develop standards for IEPs and conduct periodic audits to ensure quality and compliance standards are met

Provide additional guidance and training to IEP teams regarding student placements, and continually evaluate YCSD’s continuum of program and services

Provide schools with a model for supporting instruction and inclusion in the general education setting

41

Behavior Programs

Program Profile

42

Favorable trends in special education suspensions (> 10 days)

― 4A Special Education over-representation risk

― 4B Race or ethnicity over-representation risk

8.19

10.63

5.144.56

5.06

3.03

1 1 1 1

3.38

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Risk Ratio 4A Risk Ratio 4B

Improvement Opportunities

43

Behavior intervention implementation fidelity

Progress measurement and monitoring in Behavior Intervention Plans (BIPs)

Recommendations

44

Expand on current efforts to build proactive and responsive behavioral support systems across YCSD

Identify and implement a Social Emotional Learning (SEL) initiative

45

Questions

46

Date Action Steps

February 13 Communication sent out to all parents

February 11-21 Form the Special Education Program Improvement Team

March 17 Update Special Education Advisory Committee

March 1- May 30 Improvement team develops an action plan based on evaluation findings and recommendations

June 1 Update School Board on Progress

Program Evaluation Next Steps

Strategic Plan Status UpdateSpecial Education Program Evaluation

February 10, 2020