Consultant urges Glen Ellyn SD 41 to expand special‑education continuum, tighten scheduling and communication

The Glen Ellyn SD 41 Board of Education heard a special‑education review from consultant Dr. Leigh Ann Frost on Dec. 15, who credited the district for several strengths but urged action to close widening achievement gaps for students with individualized education programs (IEPs).

Frost said the district maintains consistent eligibility determination and a high rate of students educated in the least‑restrictive environment (LRE). "In fiscal year 25, the district rate was 72.3% while the state target was 53.5%," she said, and noted District 41's students with IEPs scored at higher proficiency rates than statewide peers in both ELA and math. She also reported that the district outplaced about 22 students in FY25 and that special‑education caseload ranges are between 7.6 and 10.5 students.

At the same time, Frost identified four broad areas for improvement — planning/logistics, special‑education instruction, communication, and professional development — and delivered a set of concrete recommendations. She urged the district to develop a broader continuum of services so it can offer more intensive, full‑day programs where needed; to create a curriculum map that pairs programs with student profiles, service minutes and progress‑monitoring tools; and to prioritize scheduling so students with IEPs get their services regularly and lawfully.

"Staffing levels are correct for what you have as your continuum of service now," Frost said in response to board questions, adding that if the district expands programs it will likely need to reassess staffing ratios and group sizes: "If you incorporate those (intensive programs) ... you will probably want more, probably a 5 to 7 number of students within that grouping." She recommended creating checklists and clearer shared resources so staff and parents can find and use guidance documents.

Board members raised detailed questions about paraeducator roles, the district’s multi‑tiered system of supports (MTSS) and whether curricular design is limiting students’ ability to meaningfully participate. Board member Jason Lobach, speaking as a parent, cautioned against assuming staffing is sufficient for an expanded continuum; Frost reiterated staffing fits current service levels but would need revision if services change. District staff said paraeducators were noted by parents as a strength but also identified for further professional development.

A parent who addressed the board during the public‑comment period, Helen Bosacki, urged the board to integrate MTSS reform into the district’s special‑education strategy so children who do not qualify for formal protections still receive timely interventions. "A reformed MTSS system would help these children as they're on their journey toward perhaps eventually securing a 504 plan or IEP," she said.

Superintendent Jeff McHugh and board members said they appreciated the report and described next steps as iterative. McHugh said the district would "digest this" and bring the findings through staff and parent groups to prioritize work. Board members signaled support for near‑term improvements in communication and staff training and acknowledged larger issues — space and new program development — will require longer‑term planning.

The consultant’s written report (distributed in advance) and the presentation documented numerical details such as the approximately 12% special‑education rate, use of a needs‑based formula for related services, and staffing counts (10 FTE social workers; 7 FTE psychologists). Frost recommended a comprehensive physical‑space study, prioritized scheduling for IEP services, a formal curriculum map tied to service minutes and fidelity checks, and a parent‑staff collaboration group to improve communications. The board did not take formal action on the report at the meeting; the administration said it will return with implementation plans and timelines.