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

Spieler v. Mt. Diablo Unified School Districteducation funds provided by Congress will never meet all of those needs. States try to makeup the difference, but this, unfortunately, is not happening anywhere in the country. Localgovernments have no choice but to assist, but concerns were expressed in interviews as towhether the encroachment for Mt. Diablo has been too high.Nationally, all state and local education agencies are required to follow the federallegislation (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). All states submit a special educationplan to the U.S. Department of Education and direct local districts do the same. Many ofthe states’ regulations, as is the case in California, exceed federal requirements. This is notuncommon, but in the case of MDUSD, the solutions have distinguished themselves as “bestpractice.”Many of the MDUSD programs developed over the past ten years are considered bestpractice and are models for other school districts. The three new programs established as aresult of the Consent Decree also have their weakness: funding. The expected $20 millioncommitment over ten years has expanded to a $34 million encroachment in the district’sGeneral Fund for budget year 2009 alone. Special education in MDUSD costs the districtapproximately $60 million and over one half of the district’s maintenance of fiscal effort isfrom the General Fund.MDUSD has undergone serious budget cuts over the past three years, and is nowexperiencing difficulty retaining even basic programs. The majority of students served inprograms for mildly disabled do not perform well on state competency tests. The district isexperiencing a great influx of Hispanic students with English deficiencies and culturaldifferences that appear to present challenges for many schools. The Model AugmentativeProgram has established “specialty” programs in certain areas requiring almost fourhundred students to be bused outside their neighborhood school—some a great distancefrom their home. The Model Aide Training Program has resulted in almost 70 studentshaving one‐on‐one assistants (aides) committed in the student IEP, which has socialimplications for the child as well as financial implications for the district. The full‐timeParent Liaison position has undergone turnover in early 2009. The Parent Liaison hasattended an array of meetings, community events, and training workshops to remain awareof the current needs of students and families.The issues affected by this plan, as discussed above, are detailed in Chapters 4 and 6 of thisreport. Issues relative to this chapter are in the form of “plans” as cited in the ConsentDecree and prepared by the district’s court appointed Consent Decree administrator. Mostissues within the plan are compliant. The following is a summary of the 22 CorrectiveAction Plans with recommendations prepared by the Consent Decree liaison. MGT supportsthese considerations.MGT of America, Inc. Page 6‐2