Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District presents special-education profile and three-year language instruction plan
Summary
The district reviewed the state’s 14 special-education indicators (2022–23) and a 2024–27 language-instruction plan: many indicators lacked public reporting because of small cohort sizes; the district met federal requirements and reported a 92.86% result for its evaluation-timeline indicator.
At its regular meeting the board received two state-required reports: the 2022–23 local special-education profile (14 indicators) and the district’s 2024–27 language instruction educational program (LIEP) three-year plan.
Nicole, the special-services presenter, reviewed the IDEA/Department of Education indicators and said several indicators did not report public data because the district is a preK–8 district or the counts fell below the state minimum N size for public reporting. On the compliance indicator that measures percent of initial evaluations completed within the state timeline (90 days), Nicole reported a local result of 92.86% against a state target of 100%.
"For 2022–23 our local results were 92.86%," Nicole said, noting the state expects 100% for the child-find/evaluation timeline indicator. She said the state recognizes documented reasons for delays when they are submitted in the district’s reporting.
Nicole also presented the LIEP three-year plan: the district identified 20 students eligible for English-as-a-second-language services in the October snapshot, uses an ESL-only program (two ESL-certified teachers and no bilingual/bicultural teachers), and monitors students for two years after exit from ESL status. She noted the district did not accept a Title III allocation in 2023–24 but will join a consortium this year with neighboring districts to access Title III funds and immigrant allocations.
The presentation described identification procedures (home-language survey, records review and screens), program-selection criteria and monitoring practices for exited students (for example, an ACCESS for ELLs score threshold and two-year monitoring). Nicole said staff will use state fact sheets and district data to inform curriculum and service planning and agreed to share links and one-page indicator summaries with board members who requested them.
Board members thanked staff and asked that the one-page indicators and links from the Department of Education be distributed to the board for further review.
No formal board action beyond acceptance of the reports was required at the meeting.
