Independent review finds White Plains special education program strong on inclusion but calls for clearer processes and more coaching

White Plains Board of Education members received an independent special education review from Public Consulting Group (PCG) that praised the district’s expansion of inclusive practices but recommended clearer placement processes, strengthened MTSS, and more in-classroom coaching for behavior supports.

PCG consultant Dr. Jennifer Barabeau told the board that the district has made “major strides” in inclusion: 72 percent of students with disabilities spend 80 percent or more of the school day in general education settings. She said White Plains’ graduation rate for students with disabilities is 77 percent, above the state average cited in the presentation (66 percent), and the district’s dropout rate for that group was reported at about 3 percent. PCG said those strengths are paired with “low turnover” and experienced staff as a foundation for further work.

PCG’s review used a mixed-methods design: 36 focus groups, surveys offered in English and Spanish, about 50 classroom observations across eight schools, a file review of 25 Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) using a “golden thread” rubric, and a review of roughly 75 documents. The consultants said staff survey response rates were unusually high and that about half of parents of students with IEPs completed the parent survey.

The consultants identified five principal takeaways: (1) sustain the district’s approach that special education is a service, not a place, while preserving a full continuum of placements; (2) strengthen school–district collaboration by involving principals more directly in decision-making; (3) refine behavioral supports so staff receive more in-classroom modeling and practical coaching; (4) refine MTSS and pre-referral interventions at the intersection of ELL and special education and expand translated materials; and (5) narrow the gap between high expectations and day-to-day Tier 1 instruction through coaching and aligned instructional practice.

PCG recommended near-term next steps including creation of an action planning committee (phase 5), stakeholder engagement to prioritize recommendations, development of an action plan with roles, timelines and key performance indicators, and the publication of an FAQ and public report. PCG said district stakeholders will be invited to sign a survey to indicate interest in joining the action planning process and that alternative virtual participation options will be available.

Board members thanked the consultants and raised operational questions. Trustees asked that the full report be made available to board members earlier in future reviews, urged rapid translation of IEPs for families, and pressed for clarity about how placement decisions are communicated to school staff. PCG responded that the review team could not retroactively determine whether any individual CSE decision was correct, but that patterns in survey and focus-group data suggested a gap in staff understanding of placement processes and recommended a more transparent framework for decision-making.

The district and PCG emphasized that the report is intended to support an action-oriented path forward. PCG said the district’s next steps will include an action-planning committee, a publicly posted FAQ, and additional opportunities for stakeholder feedback. PCG asked trustees to complete a sign-up survey and noted the full report and FAQ would be posted the day after the board presentation.

What’s next: PCG’s FAQ and full report will be released to trustees and the public as announced; the board and central office will coordinate recruitment for the action-planning committee and follow the timeline outlined by PCG.