Ally, the district's director of special education, gave the governing board a comprehensive overview of how the Lake Havasu Unified School District (LHUSD) implements special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) during the Oct. 16 meeting.

The presentation outlined key procedural timelines, staffing levels, contracted services and compliance steps the district uses to serve students with disabilities. Ally said special education “is a legal framework under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,” and described how students are referred, evaluated and placed.

The district walks parents through an initial meeting within 15 days of a referral, testing completed within 60 days after signed permission, and an individualized education program (IEP) developed within 30 days of the results meeting if a student is found eligible. IEPs are reviewed annually; a reevaluation or review must occur at least every three years. Ally told the board that the district requires quarterly progress reporting on IEP goals and that those reports are sent with regular quarter report cards.

Why it matters: special education services affect roughly one-fifth of LHUSD students and involve both federal compliance and district staffing decisions that influence classroom workloads and budgets.

The board received staffing and caseload figures: the district identified about 770 students with disabilities (numbers described as “about a week old”), and reported roughly 35 special education teachers, 63 paraeducators, and four E-helper positions. Ally said there were a small number of open positions (two to three teacher openings, about five paraeducator openings at the time of the presentation) and roughly six district office staff supporting special education operations. She said typical caseloads “tend to be 30 or less,” but caseloads sometimes rise above that and staffing audits are used to assess needs.

Ally described the district’s mix of in-house and contracted related-service providers: one in-person speech-language pathologist (SLP) and one SLPA, five virtual SLPs contracted through VOCO Vision (with an additional contractor set to start), one part-time occupational therapist contracted through ProCare, one physical therapist and one physical therapy assistant employed by LHUSD, and four full-time and one part-time psychologist contracted through ProCare. Behavior support is provided by an applied behavior analyst contracted through Essential Behavior two to three days per week; two registered behavior technician positions were listed as open and contracted through VOCO Vision. The district also employs a staff member dedicated to Medicaid reimbursement.

Ally summarized placement levels used locally: service Level A (students spend 80% or more of the day with general-education peers), Level B (resource placements, 41–79% with general-education peers), Level C (self-contained classrooms at the elementary and secondary levels, less than 40% with general-education peers) and Level H (homebound or home placement for medical or extreme behavioral needs). She stressed the district’s goal to include students “in specials, in lunch, in recess” whenever appropriate.

On compliance, Ally said LHUSD uses the same forms and processes that the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) uses to prepare for state monitoring. She reported that ADE operates on a five-year monitoring cycle, the district was in year three of that cycle, ADE would return for monitoring in about a month, and the district would undergo a full audit in year four that commonly results in a corrective action plan with a one‑year turnaround.

Board members asked how special education teachers receive training and how general education teachers are informed about IEPs and accommodations. Ally said teachers can access a student’s IEP through an icon in the district’s SIS (Synergy) linked to the IEP platform; she also said general education teachers are invited to and expected to attend IEP meetings and that special education staff solicit teacher feedback for quarterly trainings. A board member noted concerns that relying solely on an icon is insufficient, especially for secondary teachers with multiple classes; Ally agreed to clarify communication and follow up with the board.

The presentation included program administration details: case managers are assigned to IEPs and must finalize paperwork within five days of meetings; the district conducts random IEP audits; and the special education team provides monthly professional development that includes legislative changes and compliance guidance.

On district capacity and next steps, Ally said the district continually assesses staffing and added that while more paraprofessionals could help classrooms, the district currently struggles to fill open positions. Board members praised the work to date and requested follow-up information, including whether the district can or should open additional paraprofessional positions and how staffing gaps affect instruction. The board also asked for a later update tying special education needs to student achievement and budget considerations.

Ending: The board expressed support for the special education team and asked staff to return with follow-up data and any budget implications for adding paraprofessionals or other supports.