Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews Title 6B special‑education plan; federal funds mainly fund staff and coordinated early intervention
Summary
Henrico officials presented the Title 6B federal grant annual plan: HCPS uses the grant primarily for salaries and benefits for special education staff, contract services (sign‑language interpreters, nursing), CCIS to address disproportionality, and noted maintenance of effort obligations; federal funds account for about 17% of special‑education funding in the division.
Henrico County Public Schools officials presented the annual plan for Title 6B federal grant funds at the April 16 work session, outlining how the grant supports special education staff, related services and early‑intervening supports.
Dr. Katie Smith and Leslie Hughes explained that HCPS funds special education primarily with local tax dollars (about 53%), followed by state revenue (about 30%) and federal grants (about 17%). The 6B allocation is split to support school‑age services (Section 611) and early childhood services (Section 619). For school‑age programming, the presenters said the majority of the grant pays salaries and benefits for 89 special‑education teachers, 47 instructional assistants, two speech‑language pathologists, three specialists and six coordinators; 26 elementary department chair stipends are also funded by the grant. A portion of the grant covers contract services (for example, sign‑language interpreters and nursing) and independent educational evaluations. The speakers said funds are also reserved for CCIS (Coordinated Comprehensive Early Intervening Services) to reduce disproportionality, including board‑certified behavior analysts, registered behavior technicians, and tiered behavioral curriculums and training.
Presenters noted maintenance‑of‑effort requirements and reported a combined local‑and‑state spending amount that the division listed as $20,381.51 in the presentation. They also said the district renewed funding through the county sheriff’s office to support one special‑education teacher at the local jail. Board members asked for additional detail about equipment and contracted‑service costs so they can evaluate whether it is more efficient to purchase equipment internally rather than contract out services when possible.
Board members thanked special education staff for their work; no formal vote on the plan was recorded at the work session.
