Agency of Education outlines backlog, special‑education expectations for independent schools

The Vermont Agency of Education told the House Education Committee on May 1 that it received renewal applications from independent schools by the April 1 deadline and is working to clear a backlog created by pandemic pauses, litigation and rule changes enacted in 2023.

The backlog affects independent schools seeking approval to receive public tuition dollars, including both general‑education and therapeutic programs, and has delayed the agency's reporting and recommendations to the State Board of Education, Agency of Education interim director Laurie Dolezal said.

Dolezal (director of school improvement and interim director of Education Quality, Agency of Education) outlined the agency's approval and renewal protocol, saying the process includes an application desk review, site visits where required, internal vetting (including special‑education review), a period for the school to respond, and then a recommendation that goes to the State Board of Education subcommittee for final approval. "All of the applications were received by the April 1 deadline," Dolezal said, adding that reviews are currently underway.

The agency is prioritizing work by expiration date and by the intensity or risk category of the review, Dolezal said. She described a tentative timeline in the agency's materials: an initial desk review takes about two weeks, the agency's internal teams (for example, the special‑education unit) add their portions, the draft report is shared with the school, and the school then has 30 days to complete its portion of the report before the item proceeds to the State Board subcommittee.

Chris Kane, assistant state director for special education, described how the special‑education rules apply to independent schools that seek public funds. "Any school that's approved to receive public funds does have to be approved under those rules, which include the special education rules," Kane said, citing Rule 2,229.1 and related sections. He said the agency looks for a school's ability to implement students' individualized education programs (IEPs) and the staffing or contractual arrangements to provide services.

Kane said the rules require a plan to provide special‑education services; that plan can include an employed special educator, a contract with a special educator, or agreements with local education agencies to provide services. He added that contracting to provide services "meets the letter of the rule," but the agency "would prefer either a contract in place or a staff member employed in place." Kane also said one proposed option — meeting certain assurances through online module completion — was considered by the agency but rejected by the State Board and is no longer available in the application options.

Committee members pressed for quantification of the backlog; Dolezal said the length of delay varies by school and expiration date and offered to provide further detail in follow‑up materials. She attributed the backlog to several discrete causes: a pause in approval work during 2020–21 because of COVID‑19, litigation in 2022 that delayed processing, and multiple iterations of revised application and assurance documents in January 2023 to align with rule changes.

On investigations, Dolezal described the process when the agency receives a complaint: an initial screening by the secretary, assignment of an investigation team for fact‑finding, legal counsel review, and then a recommendation from the secretary to the Council of Independent Schools. If the council disagrees with the recommendation, the matter can be referred to a hearing before the State Board of Education. Dolezal said the council "is active" and has participated in investigations; she added that, to her knowledge, there is not a backlog of investigations and the agency is resourced to conduct them.

Dolezal and Kane repeatedly urged the committee to review the detailed process documents the agency provided and to invite partner agencies (for example, Department for Children and Families for residential licensure or fire regulation authorities) to testify on their inspection protocols, since the agency's site reviews incorporate materials from those partners.

The agency told the committee it is taking steps to expedite applications that do not require a new site review while scheduling site visits for schools that do. The agency also flagged potential process improvements and said it will coordinate closely with the State Board of Education, which has ultimate authority to approve or revoke an independent school's approval status.

Committee members asked for follow‑up on the size and timing of the backlog and on how the agency's public‑school review processes compare to those for independent schools; agency staff offered to provide additional contacts and documentation to answer those questions.

The agency did not discuss substantive details of ongoing investigations at the committee hearing.

Moving forward, the Agency of Education said it will continue reviews, coordinate with the State Board and partner agencies, and provide the committee additional documentation on backlog quantification and on the relationship between approval requirements and the delivery of special‑education services.