Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Huntley board hears detailed review of special education services, enrollment and program alignment
Summary
Special education leaders presented a district memo summarizing legal context, the continuum of services, self‑contained program descriptions and county/state comparisons; officials highlighted that 1,161 students had IEPs on last December 1 count and that 60% spend 80% or more of their day in general education.
District special education leaders told the Board on Sept. 4 that Huntley’s special education programs have been realigned and strengthened over the past two years and that data show the district serves most students with disabilities inside district programs rather than sending them to outside facilities.
Key figures and context: administrators said the district’s December 1 child count reported 1,161 students with individualized education programs (IEPs), or about 13.6% of district enrollment, compared with a state average cited by staff of roughly 16%. Staff presented how the state measures least‑restrictive‑environment access by percentage of the school day; they reported 633 students (about 60% of students with IEPs) spend 80% or more of the day in general education, 217 students (about 21%) spend 40–79% in general education, and roughly 151 students (about 14%) spend less than 40% of the day in general education. Administrators also said 3.4% of students with IEPs (38 students) are served in separate facilities outside the district, a rate lower than neighboring districts.
Program and legal framework: staff reviewed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) history and Illinois rules that permit special education services from age 3 through the school year in which a student turns 22. The district described four self‑contained program types — SNAP (Special Needs Autism Program), Strategy Ed, Structured Education Setting (SES) and Instructional Program — each with primary and secondary focus areas, multi‑sensory tools, small group instruction, and opportunities for inclusion. Administrators emphasized alignment to grade‑level standards and said nearly all students with IEPs are assessed on the same state measures as peers.
District strengths and work underway: leaders said Huntley supports a comparatively high share of complex learners within district programs (3.4% placed outside district), which they framed as evidence of local capacity. They described efforts to align curriculum and co‑teaching practices and to incorporate Universal Design for Learning (UDL) principles. Staff also said they will fold special education considerations into upcoming literacy and math adoption rollouts.
Board questions and follow‑ups: board members asked for additional breakdowns; staff provided percentages and specific counts on request and said more detailed data are published on the district special services website and in one‑page program flyers. The committee asked staff to continue providing updates tying special education program work to district curriculum and assessment plans.
