District rolls out 2025–28 special education plan, cites staffing gaps and targets below state averages

Dr. Angela Kanakhi presented the Erie City School District’s special education plan for 2025–28, outlining compliance work, outcomes, and proposed professional development to improve student outcomes and compliance monitoring.

The plan matters because the district serves roughly 2,500 special education students, about 23.7% of total enrollment as of Dec. 1, and current graduation and post‑school outcome metrics lag state targets. Kanakhi said the plan was posted for the required 28‑day public review and is intended to guide continuous improvement and regulatory compliance.

Kanakhi told the board the district’s special education graduation (LEA) rate is 79.7%, up from 76.6%, compared with a state target of 85.9%. The district’s dropout rate for grades 7–12 is 20.0%, down from 22.8% but above the state target of 12%. Kanakhi also said that one state‑monitored measure — the share of time students spend in the regular class at least 40% of the time — shows the district at 16.9% versus the state level of 10.3% (the district explained that in this measure higher numbers indicate fewer students are educated with typical peers and that the state target is lower). She emphasized that some outcome measures are affected by poor survey response rates after students leave the district and recommended closer collaboration with school case managers to improve post‑school survey returns.

Board members pressed on operational matters. A board member asked why the district’s in‑class rates are lower and whether placement is an IEP team decision; Kanakhi responded that placement is an IEP team decision and that the district needs to strengthen co‑teaching models to use resources effectively. Another board member asked whether the district remains behind on completing IEPs; administrators said the district is behind on IEP updates in part because the district lacks sufficient certified special education teachers and supervisors and the hiring process is taking longer than expected. “We are working with the current special education supervisors to review all those IEPs, but it’s going much slower than we anticipated,” one administrator said.

Kanakhi described the plan’s framework — performance objectives, processes, procedures and a personnel profile that includes teacher positions and caseloads. The plan proposes professional learning for teachers, parents and administrators in research‑based high‑leverage practices, co‑teaching and differentiated instruction, and a steering committee composed of board members, community agencies, parents, teachers and central‑office administrators.

Administrators said they are exploring regional placement strategies (east, west, central) to reduce long student transports caused by a historic uneven distribution of specialized programs and noted that space constraints at some schools drive program placement decisions. The district said it is not ready to recommend a major redistribution or new specialized classrooms until staffing can be backfilled: “We want to make sure that we have enough special ed teachers before we start shifting more staff into administration,” a district official said.

Ending: The plan will return for follow‑up as the district continues hiring, implements professional development, and examines regional placement options; Kanakhi said she would return next week to discuss autism supports and services.