Citizen Portal
Sign In

Conewago Valley SD projects savings by taking back autistic‑support classes from LIU

Conewago Valley School District Personnel & Finance Committee · February 18, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

District staff outlined plans to reintegrate autistic‑support classes previously provided by the Lincoln Intermediate Unit, citing per‑student LIU costs, in‑house class cost estimates and potential savings of roughly $227,000 per class if the district runs these programs locally.

District financial staff presented a cost comparison showing potential savings if Conewago Valley School District brings autistic‑support services back from the Lincoln Intermediate Unit (LIU) into district‑run classrooms. The board heard figures the administration said were drawn from its memo and budget work.

A district finance representative described LIU’s shift to a fee‑based model and cited a LIU per‑student cost of about $64,934. The district’s estimated in‑house cost for a comparable autistic‑support classroom (teacher plus two aides and benefits) was presented at roughly $291,000 per class; staff said eight students per class is typical for that model. The administration said that, with full classes, the district could save about $227,000 per class compared with placing students at the LIU.

The discussion included operational considerations: space and facility needs for specialized classrooms, minimum staffing (one teacher and two aides per autistic‑support class), and the district’s plan to add seats as part of a multiyear staffing plan. Officials cautioned that population growth in special education may reduce net savings and that the district must meet legal special‑education space and staffing requirements.

Board members asked for line‑item detail and for the budget to reflect realistic fill rates; staff said the projected savings are not a one‑for‑one guarantee but are included in subcategory 2290 of the proposed budget. No formal decision to accelerate takeback was made at the meeting; the administration said the takeback plan remains part of an approved multiyear staffing strategy.