FCMAT special‑education review prompts public outcry and board questions; staff outline next steps

The San Francisco Board of Education heard a voluntary review from the Fiscal Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) of the district's special education services and fielded more than an hour of public comment focused on staffing cuts, caseloads and program changes.

FCMAT analyst Carolyn Benno told the board the district faces an "inverse relationship" between declining general‑education enrollment and rising special‑education enrollment, and that "your funding is tied to general education enrollment, not special education enrollment." Benno said the district's special‑education enrollment was about 13.59 percent and urged stronger, districtwide multi‑tiered systems of support (MTSS), clearer eligibility processes and consideration of program designs that would reduce reliance on nonpublic schools.

Why it matters: Special education consumes a large and growing share of district resources nationwide; the board and the public said they want FCMAT's findings contextualized with local outcomes and an operational plan before any staffing or program changes are implemented.

FCMAT findings and recommendations

Carolyn Benno, the FCMAT special‑education analyst who led the presentation, highlighted several key takeaways the team found in its voluntary review: that the district's special‑education percentage is increasing, that student counts for some disabilities (including autism) are rising, and that funding is constrained because special‑education funding is tied to general‑education enrollment.

Benno summarized the recommendations as: strengthen MTSS across schools so interventions precede eligibility; standardize eligibility determinations to reduce inconsistent identification across sites; review staffing and caseload approaches (FCMAT recommended the district continue using its 1:22 Resource Specialist Program guideline rather than the education code maximum); analyze paraeducator assignments including one‑to‑one placements; and evaluate whether some specialized, county‑style programs could be provided inside SFUSD rather than by contracted nonpublic schools.

"When we look at whether or not a student qualifies for special education, we look at two different parts in the test," Benno told the board. "Do they have a disability that meets our education code criteria? And then do they actually need specially…