Study of the Mount Diablo Unified School District - Mt. Diablo Unified ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND PEER DISTRICT COMPARISONSIn September 2009, the Mount Diablo Unified School District (MDUSD) contracted withMGT of America, Inc. (MGT) to conduct a study of the district Special Education and Section504 Programs. The MGT review team worked collaboratively with MDUSD to conduct thiscomprehensive study. The review tasks included:• Analysis of operations of the delivery of special education services throughout thedistrict to ensure the effective use of resources while providing quality specialeducation services to students with disabilities identified under the Individuals withDisabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) and Section 504 of the RehabilitationAct of 1973.• Review service delivery options that may be expanded or modified to realize costsavings with recommendations that will suggest strategies for reallocating resourcesand program development to improve program effectiveness.• Review the balance between providing a full continuum or services for students withdisabilities that are required while providing full consideration of the financial effectsthat the disproportionate funding of special education has on the district.• Review communication practices and opportunities for dialog with parents todetermine community satisfaction with all district processes relating to obtainingservices for their students.• Analysis of over‐representation of students of ethnic subgroup cohorts.• Review instructional practices, policies, and district procedures that are in place tohelp increase academic success and thereby reduce disproportionality in theidentification of students as disabled under IDEA or Section 504 as well as itsrelationship to disproportionate discipline rates by school.• Review progress under Speiler v Mt. Diablo Unified School District Consent Decreeregarding free status of administrative systemic, programmatic, and architectonicalbarriers.• Review procedures, practices, communication, training, and resources to allow staffto provide equitable, high quality, effective special education services to all studentswith Individual Education Plans (IEPs) or Section 504 Plans regardless of the severityor type of disability.Our methodology for conducting a thorough study of district special education and Section504 programs is based on state and federal regulations and research‐based, proveneffectivebest practices. An integrated, evaluative approach is reflected in the coordinationMGT of America, Inc. Page 1‐1
Introduction and Peer District Comparisonsof programmatic evaluation tasks and activities with cost analysis tasks and activities,thereby yielding a more comprehensive analysis of the true efficiency, effectiveness, andcosts associated with special education services. MGT utilizes quantitative and qualitativedata analysis to evaluate the strengths of special education services and delivery models, toanalyze MDUSD services, and to identify areas in need of improvement. Our methodologyis based on our extensive experience conducting similar studies throughout the country.The MGT review team used various types of instruments for collecting data and informationnecessary to complete the special education study, including:• Peer District Comparison/Benchmarking. The practice of benchmarking is oftenused to make comparisons between and among school districts. Benchmarkingrefers to the use of commonly held organizational characteristics in making concretestatistical or descriptive comparisons of organizational systems and processes. It isalso a performance measurement tool used in conjunction with improvementinitiatives to measure comparative operating performance and identify bestpractices. With this in mind, MGT performed a benchmarking comparison ofMDUSD to provide a common foundation from which to compare systems andprocesses within the school district with those of other, similar districts. MGT andMDUSD jointly selected the peer districts based on factors such as studentenrollment, student achievement, and student‐to‐staff ratios.• Stakeholder Survey Instruments. The instruments created to survey administrators,special education teachers, general education teachers, support staff, and parentswere developed from a comprehensive list of evaluation questions we havedeveloped through our experience with similar specialized studies. We jointlyselected items appropriate for specific surveys for each group of stakeholders. Thestakeholder surveys were tailored so that the opinions of multiple stakeholdergroups could be compared in the analysis of the results. The purpose of the surveyswas to provide information on indicators of program quality and cost effectiveness.Complete survey results are included in Appendix A. MGT uses a statistical formulato establish the survey response rate in order to declare the survey results are“representative” of the population surveyed. In instances when the target returnrate is not achieved, the results may still be used as indicators of stakeholderperceptions. In the case of MDUSD, response rates for general education teachersexceeded the standard; all other survey groups were below the standard, as shownin Exhibit 1‐1.MGT of America, Inc. Page 1‐2
Page 1 and 2: A Study of theMount Diablo Unified
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGEEXECUTIVE SUMM
Page 6 and 7: Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryF
Page 8 and 9: Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryI
Page 10 and 11: Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryF
Page 14 and 15: Introduction and Peer District Comp
Page 32 and 33: CHAPTER 2: DISTRICT OPERATIONS AND
Page 34 and 35: District Operations and Associated
Page 56 and 57: CHAPTER 3: SERVICE DELIVERY OPTIONS
Page 58 and 59: Service Delivery Options and Contin
Page 60 and 61: Service Delivery Options and Contin
Page 62 and 63:
Service Delivery Options and Contin
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
CHAPTER 4: POLICIES, PROCEDURES, AN
Page 92 and 93:
Policies, Procedures, and Complianc
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
CHAPTER 5: PERSONNEL SERVICES AND P
Page 116 and 117:
Personnel Services and Professional
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
CHAPTER 6: SPIELER V. MT. DIABLO UN
Page 126 and 127:
Spieler v. Mt. Diablo Unified Schoo
Page 128 and 129:
Spieler v. Mt. Diablo Unified Schoo
Page 130 and 131:
APPENDIX A: SURVEYRESULTS
Page 132 and 133:
PART A: ADMINISTRATION7. Special ed
Page 134 and 135:
EXHIBIT A-3 (Continued)COMPARISON O
Page 136 and 137:
PART E: CURRICULUM ANDINSTRUCTIONE.
Page 138 and 139:
EXHIBIT A-7COMPARISON OF SURVEY RES
Page 140 and 141:
PART G: DISCIPLINEEXHIBIT A-9COMPAR
Page 142 and 143:
EXHIBIT A-11COMPARISON OF SURVEY RE
Page 144 and 145:
PART K: SPECIALEDUCATION PROGRAMFUN
Page 146 and 147:
Appendix A: Survey ResultsEXHIBIT A
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
APPENDIX BBIBLIOGRAPHYBooksAspy, Ru
show all

Study of the Mount Diablo Unified School District - Mt. Diablo Unified ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?