Consultants say Greenwich made measurable progress on special education but recommend deeper work on coaching and a few programs

Members of the Greenwich Board of Education heard a detailed update Feb. 26 from Public Consulting Group (PCG) on the district's multi-year special-education review, including measurable improvements and remaining gaps that require continued work.

PCG consultants told the board the district has implemented many of the 28 items from the original audit, including a consistent MTSS framework, expanded Universal Design for Learning (UDL) supports and a newly created specialized-evaluation team. PCG said those changes helped Greenwich reduce out-of-district placements from 42 to 32 and recover about $800,000 into district programming.

The report matters because the changes affect whether students with disabilities can stay in-district and receive specialized services closer to home, PCG said. Board members and district leaders said the findings will shape next steps in the district's action plan and budget decisions.

PCG said the district met or substantially advanced several compliance and program goals. Consultant Jennifer Barabeau said the district reached 98% completion of initial special-education referrals within the 45-day timeline this school year, up from 71% at baseline. The team also credited an inclusion specialist and districtwide UDL training for visible changes in classrooms.

"A big milestone was that GPS achieved its goal of completing 98% of initial referrals within the 45 day timeline by this school year," PCG reported. The consultants said they observed model classrooms implementing UDL and described stronger co-teaching supports and co-planning templates, though they noted that co-teaching remains harder to scale at the secondary level.

PCG also reported improvements in specialized-program capacity: the district launched a Unique Learner Program and an academic-lab model aligned to IEP goals, and it introduced an assistive-technology approach that includes high-, mid- and low-tech supports observed in classrooms.

At the same time, consultants recommended moving from technical fixes to more adaptive work: deeper coaching, clearer role definitions and more consistent program quality across schools. "Staff described some professional development as ‘one and done,'" PCG said; consultants recommended more embedded coaching so training leads to durable classroom change.

Board members asked about family engagement, bilingual outreach and plans for continuing professional development. PCG said parent focus groups and a district newsletter called Together We Can reflect improved communication, but parents and some staff still reported uneven program consistency across schools.

PCG's written recommendations included a deeper analysis of the wellness center and Winrose program, continued refinement of the Unique Learner Program, expansion of the PINE inclusion framework across grade levels, clearer case-manager role definitions, and a synthesized next-phase action plan that priorities the most impactful items.

Superintendent Dr. Jones thanked PCG for their work and said the district is already using the report to inform staffing and training priorities. Board members pressed for more specifics on how coaching and targeted PD will be funded and rolled out; PCG reiterated that the next phase should emphasize embedded coaching and clearer implementation checks.

The report and its recommendations will inform ongoing budget and staffing discussions in upcoming board and town budget hearings.

Ending: PCG's presentation was followed by a board‑level Q&A but no formal vote; district leaders said they will return with implementation steps and budget implications in the coming weeks.