Paraprofessionals describe pay and safety struggles; parent alleges para abuse during public comments

At the Feb. 25 Poudre School District Board of Education meeting, several community members used the public comment period to raise concerns about paraprofessional pay and working conditions, trust in the district’s handling of staff misconduct, and academic outcomes for students with individualized education programs (IEPs).

Paraprofessionals pressed for higher pay and safety supports. Lacey Nixon, a paraprofessional in the affected‑needs program at Rocky Mountain High School, said she “loves my job” but described staffing realities that she said are unsustainable: she told the board she has been “hit, bitten, punched, threatened, and cursed at” while supporting students and that recent injuries required urgent care. Nixon told the board the pay is insufficient to cover housing and tuition and said she had to drop out of college because she could not afford tuition.

Patricia Guldeman, another paraprofessional in the affected‑needs program at Rocky Mountain High School, described trauma‑informed supports she provides and warned that the district is losing experienced staff to higher‑paying jobs outside education. She urged the board to “value and appropriately compensate” paraprofessionals who she said work with students with the highest needs.

Parent alleges abuse and distrust of district response. Sabrina Herrick read a Facebook post in which a parent wrote that her 7‑year‑old child on an IEP “alleges abuse by her para at school,” that the child had bruising, and that the parent did not trust the district’s response. Herrick said she had been trespassed from district property after raising past complaints and said whistleblowers and families face retaliation. She asked the board to identify who in the district families can trust to handle allegations.

Concerns for students with disabilities and monitoring data. Danny Lawrence, who works with families of students with disabilities, questioned the district’s claim that students with IEPs showed “positive growth effect,” citing graduation and state assessment statistics he described as poor and asking how the board and staff are reviewing how any improvement claims were calculated. He said: “How does that support graduation with options for this population?”

A parent and resident also raised related long‑running trust issues and asked how the district will ensure families’ safety reports are handled. Several speakers urged more transparency, stronger responses to credible allegations of staff misconduct, and improved pay and retention for paraprofessionals.

Board response. The board listened to public comments but did not engage in a point‑by‑point response during the public‑comment period; board practice at the meeting was to accept public comment without back‑and‑forth.

What to expect next. Several board members and staff acknowledged the concerns and noted the district’s existing human‑resources and student‑safety processes; repeated requests in public comment for clarity on complaint pathways, and for more transparent, timely investigation updates, suggest families and staff will press for follow‑up. The board did not take formal action on the topics raised during the public comment session at this meeting.