Parents and providers warn of special‑education strains and proposed autism‑waiver cuts
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Several parents, advocates and a waiver provider told the board that nonpublic special education schools and Maryland's autism waiver are essential supports; advocates urged the board to preserve options and raised alarms about proposed reductions to intensive support hours and environmental adaptation funding.
Parents, advocates and a large autism‑waiver provider told the State Board that nonpublic special education schools and the autism waiver are critical parts of Maryland’s continuum of services and that proposed state cuts would harm families.
Lisonbee Clark, a parent who described her 22‑year‑old daughter Sutton’s progress at a nonpublic special education program, asked the board to remember "Sutton’s story" when it considers policies affecting nonpublic schools. "Nonpublic schools are not other options. They are essential," Clark said during public comment.
Other parents echoed that message. Anne Schultz said Baltimore Lab School, an arts‑based nonpublic special education program, restored her son’s confidence and helped him reach a college‑bound trajectory. Latoya Superville described a Harford County child who began in early intervention, later needed more intensive services, and benefits from a placement at a Kennedy Krieger program.
Erin Clark, vice president of operations at CelebrateAbility (identified in her remarks as Maryland’s largest autism‑waiver provider), told the board that stakeholders were informed in late October of proposed “cost‑saving” reductions to the autism waiver. She said the proposals would reduce intensive individual support services (IISS) from 40 hours per week to 25 in some cases and suspend funding for environmental accessibility adaptations (EAA) such as locks and sensors. "These changes would be a catastrophic void in our community supports," she said, warning the cuts could cause dire safety outcomes for vulnerable children.
Advocates also asked the board to protect the continuum of the least‑restrictive environment, saying some districts have eliminated self‑contained classes and that forcing children into general education without necessary supports is harmful.
The board did not take formal action on the public comments. Several comments were made during the public comment period that preceded the consent agenda and regulatory votes. MSDE subsequently proceeded with regulatory actions and program updates during the meeting.
Ending: Speakers requested that board members consider families’ experiences when evaluating regulations and budget proposals that affect nonpublic placements and waiver funding, and asked MSDE to ensure the continuum of services is preserved for students with complex needs.