FCMAT SPECIAL EDUCATION REPORT HAS BEEN RELEASED

Dr. Lawrence released the FCMAT Special Education Report to the board members at the Mt. Diablo School District Board of Education meeting last night.  Below is a link to the district website where the report has been posted for community input.    Please email me with your comments.  Thanks.
Lorrie Davis  

CAC Chairperson
See FCMAT SPECIAL EDUCATION REPORT HERE.

Mt. Diablo parents worried about proposed changes in special education busing

By Theresa Harrington Contra Costa Times

Posted:   09/25/2012 04:51:03 PM PDT

Updated:   09/25/2012 05:00:10 PM PDT

CONCORD -- Mt. Diablo school district parents are distraught over a plan to begin "clustering" special education students at bus stops instead of providing home-to-school service.

Lorrie Davis, parent and chairwoman of the special education Community Advisory Committee said the district has not provided sufficient data to show why the busing program has to be changed. Parents want to see actual cost comparisons and they also want to see a "third party analysis" that the Fiscal Crisis and Management Team, or FCMAT, used to develop the concept of clustering students at bus stops, Davis said.

Based on the report, general counsel Greg Rolen said Mt. Diablo spends more money on transportation than many other districts in the state. But when asked to provide backup data for this assertion, he was unable to verify it. Both FCMAT and the district have denied Public Records Act request for this analysis from this newspaper, citing the district's attorney-client privilege.

Parent Denise Lambert commented that a report to the board about the district's solar projects was much more comprehensive than its report about special education transportation.

"Collaboration -- not concealment -- is necessary for us to move forward," she said. "I ask the board to continue to provide the checks and balances that your community expects."

Trustee Linda Mayo said she hoped Rolen would provide parents and the board with the answers they sought.

Read more of Theresa Harrington's Contra Costa Times article HERE.

MDUSD Transportation updates - Dr. Lawrence states no Board approval required for "cluster"

Here are the following updates on MDUSD transportation from CAC chairperson, Lorrie Davis:

Update #2  September 20, 2012

Dr. Lawrence has informed us that the decision to "cluster" is a managerial decision; therefore, board approval is not required.  He stated the decision will be made by Transportation (department) and the board will be informed of the decision.  I personally think board policy has to be approved by the board of education.  We were also told that the parent meetings will be to INFORM parents of decisions made, not gather parent input.  I find these statements very disturbing.  Parents - please contact your board members and provide your input.  

Board members names and contact information HERE.

Lorrie Davis

CAC Chairperson

Update #1 Emailed September 19, 2012

At our September 4, 2012 CAC meeting, Carolyn Patton, Special Education Administrator, provided us with an update on Special Education Transportation.  As promised, attached is the PowerPoint presentation and the new Specialized Transportation Needs Assessment form which is being used to determine eligibility.  As discussed at the meeting, the district is exploring the possibility of clustering but it has NOT yet been approved by the board of education.  They are currently collecting data to see how many students would be affected and what would be the cost savings to implement clustering in our district.  Parents input meetings have been postponed until the district decides if they will be considering a clustering model of providing transportation.  I will keep you updated as we receive more information.   

Lorrie Davis

CAC Chairperson

FCMAT Report for Transportation

The FCMAT Report for Transportation was handed to the members of the MDUSD Board of Education last evening.  It is the final report.  It can be found on the District website HERE.

MDUSD Special Education Update

By Theresa Harrington
Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 7:59 pm in Education, Mt. Diablo school district,special education.

Mt. Diablo special education administrator Carolyn Patton has posted a special education update on the CAC blog, reiterating the district’s previous commitment to hold parent meetings in September to discuss transportation changes. However, the update still does not list any times, dates or locations for these meetings.

The post also links to updated Frequently Asked Questions at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/1jYYWk0faJA6qqtaws10PqRSLZ3igqUS7IQvJYiptBxZRv5vZu8RBIx7rz2D0/edit?pli=1#

Here is the first question and answer regarding the FCMAT transportation report:

Q: “When will the final report be available?”
A: “We have received and released the draft report. We do not have a final report, but it will be released when received.”

This is very interesting, since the district has not publicly presented the draft report to the CAC or board. In fact, Trustee Cheryl Hansen said she has not received it. Although Superintendent Steven Lawrence inadvertently sent it to me, he has not mentioned it to trustees during board meetings since then. Neither has Patton. So, it’s unclear what is meant by: “We have received and released the draft report.”

Read more of Theresa Harrington's On Assignment article HERE.

MDUSD may overhaul transportation and special education programs

By Theresa Harrington

Through a Public Records Act request, I have received several emails and documents from the Fiscal Crisis Management and Assistance Team (FCMAT) related to the Mt. Diablo school district’s contract for two studies:

1) providing findings and recommendations related to the district’s transportation programs; and
2) providing a review of the district’s special education program.

As noted in recent blog posts, these findings and recommendations have not yet been presented to the school board or the public. However, the district sent a June 20 letter to parents informing them of transportation changes it claimed were recommended by FCMAT.

I have previously pointed out that some of the ideas for these changes came from the district itself, instead of from FCMAT. This came to light after Superintendent Steven Lawrence inadvertently sent me a copy of FCMAT’s draft transportation report, which did not directly support some of the changes being implemented by the district.

After Lawrence sent me that report, he followed up with an email saying that he expected the final report to be presented to the board Aug. 13. Subsequently, the Aug. 13 meeting was postponed to Aug. 20 (tonight), because two trustees were unavailable last Monday.

Contrary to Lawrence’s assurance, however, no FCMAT reports appear on tonight’s agenda. Instead, the board will consider three transportation-related staff recommendations, without any backup material from FCMAT.
The first is a contract for nearly $1.7 million to transport 132 Non Public School and County students to and from school. Neither the staff report nor the contract reveal to the board or the public how many students are in-district, how many travel outside the district or how many use wheelchairs.

According to the contract, the district pays $40 per day for ambulatory students sharing rides within the district; $120 for students in wheelchairs within the district; $70 per day for ambulatory students sharing rides outside the district, and $140 per day for students in wheelchairs traveling outside the district. In addition, the district may pay $25 per hour for ambulatory students and $40 per hour for students in wheelchairs. The board and public deserve to see a breakdown of these costs. Absent such a breakdown, it appears that the district intends to spend an average of $12,743 per student per year on this contract.

The second transportation-related item is a $307,500.00 contract with AA Med Trans to transport 24 medically fragile students. This averages $12,812 per student per year — or about $69.50 more per year per student than the Pawar charges.

Although FCMAT specifically addressed outside transportation contracts in its draft transportation report, the district is not presenting FCMAT’s findings and recommendations.

Here is what the report said: “…the district should closely evaluate the need for a third-party transportation provider. This transportation is generally provided in a one-on-one fashion and may be less efficient than transportation on a school bus.”

In addition, FCMAT recommended: “…improve transportation request forms and checklists and cluster stops for students who can reasonably get to their local school or nearby bus stop. These changes should be clearly communicated to parents well in advance.”

As has been noted in previous blog posts, the idea for clustering students came from a third-party legal analysis provided by the district to FCMAT, which both FCMAT and the district are refusing to publicly release, citing attorney-client privilege.

Read more of Theresa Harrington's On Assignment article HERE.

Dr. Lawrence, MDUSD Superintendent, states the FCMAT reports will not be on the August 13, 2012 school board agenda.

Dr. Lawrence, MDUSD Superintendent, states the FCMAT reports will not be on the August 13, 2012 school board agenda.  The earliest they will be finalized and presented to the Board Members is at the August 27, 2012 board meeting.  I asked if parents/community members will have ample time to review before the board meeting and he stated that he is trying to work something out so the community will receive the final reports at the same time the board members receive.  We spoke about a timeline so parents/community members can plan accordingly.  When he has a better understanding of when the reports will be finalized and distributed, he will give me a call and I will forward the information.

Lorrie Davis

CAC Chairperson

Update to Previous Transportation Post by Theresa Harrington

(Read Theresa Harrington's entire On Assignment post HERE.)

JULY 28 UPDATE: I sent Superintendent Steven Lawrence an email Wednesday, which included the following statement and question:

“…the report you mistakenly sent me was dated the day before you sent that email. Also Bill (Gillaspie) confirmed that FCMAT sent you the report in a July 18 email. Therefore, you had in fact received a draft report from FCMAT when you stated that you had not and when you stated that to your knowledge no one at the district had received it. Why did you make those false statements?”

Here is Lawrence’s response, which he sent in a Thursday email:

“I responded prior to receiving anything from FCMAT.”

In order to verify that FCMAT had sent Lawrence the document the day before he denied having it, I asked Gillaspie for a copy of the email sent by FCMAT.

Here is the copy Gillaspie sent:

“From: Leonel Martinez
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:44 PM
To: lawrences@mdusd.org
Cc: Bill Gillaspie
Subject: FCMAT draft report

Steven Lawrence, Ph.D., Superintendent

Mt. Diablo Unified School District
1936 Carlotta Drive
Concord, CA 94519

Dear Superintendent Lawrence:

Attached is a digital copy of the draft transportation report developed by the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) for the Mt. Diablo Unified School District. Please review this draft document and contact us with any corrections or suggested changes. After we receive this information, we will proceed to finalize the report.

Sincerely,

Leonel Martinez
FCMAT Technical Writer
(661) 636-4387

G: William P. Gillaspie, Ed.D., FCMAT Administrative Officer”

The above email shows that the draft report was sent to Lawrence at 1:44 p.m. July 18 — the day BEFORE he claimed he did not have it and said that no one else at the district did either.

The email included the same draft report attachment that Lawrence accidentally sent to me. Although some blog commenters have questioned the fact that the font with the July 18 date on the cover and cover letter is different from the rest of the document, the pdf from FCMAT includes the same dates. So, it appears that is the way the district received the report.

Now that Lawrence’s veracity has been called into question regarding the FCMAT report, I have requested copies of all emails and correspondence between the district and FCMAT from April to the present.

JULY 29 UPDATE: I have received an email from CAC Chairperson Lorrie Davis, who has informed me that the CAC executive board met with some district staff members to discuss the June 20 letter that would be sent to parents. Davis also said the district shared the June 5 FCMAT letter with the committee.

Here’s what Davis wrote today in an email:

“In regards to special ed. transportation, the CAC executive committee met with Mildred Browne, Greg Rolen and Carolyn Patton before the letter was sent out to parents explaining the new procedures. I appreciated them discussing the new procedures with us and listening to our concerns. In regards to ‘clustering’ our non-severe students, our biggest concerns are supervision and congestion at school sites. Parents I have spoken with have stated they are willing to cluster if it helps to save money and services provided for their children at school. We were amazed at how much money is being paid to parents for mileage reimbursement and agree that this practice needs to be controlled.”

MDUSD transportation plans revealed

By Theresa Harrington

After raising questions about the Mt. Diablo school district’s plans for special education and transportation, I received two documents today — one from a parent and one from Superintendent Steven Lawrence.

Here is a letter sent to many special education parents regarding transportation plans:

“June 20, 2012

Dear Parents and Guardians,

Please read this entire letter as it contains important information regarding changes for students who are eligible for transportation as a related service as part oftheir Individual Education Plan {lEP). All changes will commence during the 2012/2013 school year. The Mt. Diablo Unified School District (“District”) strives to provide quality educational programs in challenging fiscal times. As such, the District recently participated in a Financial Crisis & Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) study to assist with identifying more effective and efficient means to proVide special education transportation.

The study revealed that we are significantly overidentifying transportation as a related service for special education students. For example, the District currently provides transportation to 26% of our students with an IEP; however, in most districts reviewed by FCMAT the average was approximately 10%. The FCMAT team found that the District has an inordinately high number of parents who receive reimbursement in lieu of transpol1ation services. One similarly sized district has only two (2) parents who are paid in lieu whlle we reimburse one hundred forty-four (144) parents. In response to the FCMAT findings and recommendations, the District is modifying speciial education transportation services as follows.

Parent Reimbursements. Effective immediately transportation reimbursements will only be offered when the District is unable to transport the student. Current parent reimbursement arrangements will be honored through extended school year 2012. Any new reimbursement requests require priorapproval from Angie Goakey, Transportation Supervisor.

Home School. Beginning August 26, 2012, students who receive special education services at their home school will not receive transportation unless the IEP team determines that a student’s unique needs require transportation

.

Cluster Model. Beginning on Monday, January 7, 2013, the District will transition to a School to School (Cluster) Transportation mode. Unless otherwise noted in a student’s IEP, all transportation for students with IEPs will be from school of residence to school of placement. High school students who live in the Bay Point area will have a cluster point (bus pick-up/drop-off location) at Riverview Middle School. Middle school students who reside in the former Glenbrook Middle School attendance area will have a cluster point at the Glenbrook site.
Transportation as a related service will be reviewed with you prior to January 2013. Any specialized transportation needs will be determined by the students IEP team and documented in an IEP. Students who are medically fragile or pose significant safety concerns to themselves or others will continue to be eligible for door to door transportation. Transportation services will be reviewed at your student’s annuallEP meeting, or earlier, if needed.

We understand these changes impact your child. It is our desire to work with families during this transition. To help with the transition and answer questions the district will be offering the following:

o Parent informational meeting(s) in September 2012 (dates and location to be announced)

o Website with information regarding transportation changes and frequently asked questions

o An email address available for sending specific questions regarding transportation

For assistance during the summer break please contact: Carolyn Patton, Administrator, Special Education, (925) 682-8000, Ext. 4187; or Angie Goakey, Transportation Supervisor, (925) 682-8000, Ext. 3709.

Sincerely,

Mildred D. Browne, Ed. D., Assistant Superintendent of Pupil Services and Special Ed-ucation
Greg Rolen, General Counsel”


The above document appears to be the letter referenced by Carolyn Patton on June 25 when she told the board about the FCMAT findings:http://youtu.be/LV93z1d7wIk
However, Patton said the draft letter was from herself and Rolen. Instead, the final letter sent out was signed by Mildred Browne and Rolen.

I also received the following email from Lawrence:
“Theresa,
I needed to check with Carolyn and I believe this is the letter you are referring to. It is a (sic) exit letter of the FCMAT audit.”

But the attachment he sent was not a letter. Instead, it was a draft Transportation Review from FCMAT (Fiscal Crisis & Management Team):http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=124831160

This report is dated July 18. That is one day BEFORE Lawrence sent me the email below, dated June 19, in response to my email asking for the FCMAT report and letter mentioned at the board meeting:
“That’s interesting because I have not received a draft or final report from FCMAT. I will have to check with Board members to determine where the reports they have received came from because to my knowledge no one at the district has received copies of the draft or final reports.”

So, it appears that Lawrence may have inadvertently attached the report that he previously claimed no one had received. It’s still unclear what document Patton was referencing when she told the board in June: “In response to the FCMAT report, we have already seen the preliminary findings….” She also said, “As I think you have all seen, the FCMAT study identified….”

Read more of Theresa Harrington's On Assignment article HERE.

MDUSD superintendent responds to questions about false and misleading bond resolution

By Theresa Harrington from On Assignment 

I sent the following e-mail to Mt. Diablo schools Superintendent Steven Lawrence on Wednesday, asking him to explain misleading statements in the bond resolution approved by the board in a 4-1 on vote April 23rd (Hansen against).

I received his response this afternoon, which I am posting below my original e-mail. After reading his response, which did not include the bond documents I requested, I sent a follow-up e-mail, which I have posted after his response.

Read more HERE.

Lorrie Davis, CAC Chairperson ,Addresses The Board Of Education. Please Submit Your Comments And Concerns To The Board Members

Here is the text of Lorrie Davis', CAC Chairperson,address to the MDUSD Board of Education members on 6/28/11 regarding Item #15.26. You are encouraged to write to the Board members (and cc the Dr. Lawrence and Dr. Brown) with any questions or concerns you might have.

"I agree we must approve this item to pay for the mandated AB 3632 mental health services; however, I am concerned with the statement in the first paragraph written under the Summary section which states:

For 2010/11 the cost of AB 3632 services was budgeted at $4.8 million. Under current information received from the CDE, we anticipate receiving $3.4 million for the 2011/12 budget cycle, and $2.1 million annually after that. Therefore, the Special Education department is committed to determine reductions in the overall special education budget including the new requirements that districts are being mandated to absorb because AB 3632 was repealed, to ensure additional longer term financial pressures are not placed on the general fund.

This statement is very disturbing. How can staff guarantee they will find $1.4 million in special ed. reductions?

I understand the State has chosen to shift the responsibility of providing AB 3632 services from the County to School Districts without full funding and I applaud the board for understanding how important it is to fund this mandated program; however, why is the special ed. department responsible for absorbing the excess cost, requiring them to reduce services for all of our other special needs students?

With all the cuts special ed. has received, how can staff guarantee they will find $1.4 million in reductions? There is no where else to cut.

School Districts are under a mandate to serve all students with special needs. You cannot uphold the mandate for one group over another.

We cannot pick and choose which special ed. students will be served and which services we will provide.

In regards to financing the projected $1.4 million in excess costs, these are difficult times but the money needs to come from somewhere.
• This year, the board approved a budget in the amount of $2,428,189. Three weeks ago we received additional funding to assist with providing the new services; therefore, we spent only $8,509. The savings of over $2.4 million dollars
($2,419,680) can cover the $1.4 million projected excess cost for next year.
• For future years, according to the School Services of California dartboard, between the 2012-13 and 2015-16 fiscal years, our district will receive over $600,000each year in additional AB 602 funding; therefore, by the 2015-16 fiscal year, our special ed. funding will increase by over $2.4 million ($2,462,922).This information has already been shared with staff.



Fiscal Year Funded COLA Funding Increase
2010-11 P-2 0.00% 19,797,027.00
2011-12 0.00% 19,797,027.00 0.00
2012-13 3.20% 20,430,531.86 633,504.86
2013-14 2.70% 20,982,156.22 551,624.36
2014-15 2.90% 21,590,638.75 608,482.53
2015-16 3.10% 22,259,948.56 669,309.80

Total Increase in Funding $ 2,462,921.56




School Districts are under a mandate to serve all students with special needs.

Reductions already imposed on the special ed. program has created concern as to whether the district is fulfilling their legal obligation in providing FAPE.

It is important that we continue to make decisions that ensure mandated services are not compromised for any student."



Item 15.26

MDUSD Email Addresses

Gary Eberhart gary@mdusd.net


Sherry Whitmarsh sherrywhitmarsh@hotmail.com


Linda Mayo mayolk@aol.com


Cheryl Hansen cherylhansenmdusd@yahoo.com


Lynne Dennler lynnedennler@gmail.com


Steven Lawrence lawrences@mdusd.k12.ca.us


Mildred Browne brownem@mdusd.k12.ca.us

Superintendent PAC Meeting - Wednesday, April 6

Superintendent Parent Advisory Committee Meeting
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Dent Center
7 p.m.
See more HERE

Superintendent's Budget Article- Governor’s Budget Proposal and Impact on MDUSD

Governor Brown has acknowledged that education has been the only major program that has taken disproportionate budget reductions since 2007-08. Therefore, he committed to protect education by proposing flat funding for education for 2011-12. However, flat funding really results in about a $19 annual per pupil reduction.

The 2011-12 Governor’s Proposed Budget was submitted with an estimated 18-month budget shortfall of $25.4 billion, comprised of an $8.2 billion shortfall in 2010-11 and a $17.2 billion shortfall in 2011-12. The Governor’s proposal addresses the shortfall in three ways: (1) reducing expenditures by $12.5 billion over two years (2010-11 and 2011-12); (2) enhancing revenue by $12 billion over the same two-year period to be achieved through a June ballot measure to extend the temporary taxes enacted in 2009-10 by five years (.25 percent surcharge on income tax, 1 percent increase in the sales tax, .5 percent increase in the vehicle license fee); and (3) borrowing $1.9 billion from special funds and other one-time measures.

The success of this proposal largely depends on a two thirds bipartisan legislative approval to place the tax extension measure on the ballot and then on a majority of the voters approving the tax extension. Additionally, the Legislature would have to agree to expenditure reductions similar to ones that they have rejected in prior years. Part of the Governor’s strategy is a proposal to realign or to shift responsibility of many programs along with the revenue sources to local governments. This shift would include using one-time Proposition 63 funds of $861 million to fund community mental health services. Clearly, there are many challenges ahead for the Governor and the Legislature to balance this budget.

Read more HERE

A Message from the Superintendent

Given recent news articles around our District’s budget and the dire State budget projections, we have decided to send out two newsletters about our budget situation. The first article will focus on the status of our current budget. The second article will focus on how the Governor’s budget proposal will affect our District.

Read more HERE.

Letter from the Superintendent

June 23, 2010



Dear Parents and Community of the Mt. Diablo Unified School District:

In a time of unprecedented budget deficits throughout the state, the Mt. Diablo Unified School District ("District") like many others is forced into the untenable position of making drastic reductions in staff and services. Ongoing state budget cuts have severely impacted the amount of money we receive from the State of California to educate the children of our community. As a result of decreasing revenues and declining student enrollment, the District's annual operating deficit is projected to average nearly $13 million per year for the next three years, on top of the approximately $24.8 million deficit for what remains of the 2009/10 fiscal year.

Although we have already responded to the budget deficit by implementing staff reductions and non-personnel cuts totaling $15.88 million, we regretfully find ourselves in the position of having to ask for additional concessions from all of our bargaining units in order to present a balanced budget to the County Office of Education by June 30.

In the event we are not able to present a balanced budget in 2010/11 and beyond, there is a very real possibility that the state could take over our District. If there is a takeover and a State Administrator is appointed, your elected representatives (the Board of Education) and by extension you, will have no say in running the District. That is an outcome I know that none of us want to see come to pass.

I am certain that you have questions about the District's finances and what is happening at the bargaining table. Therefore, I am enclosing answers to some of the most frequently asked questions about the budget and the status of bargaining.

I am confident that with continued cooperation we will see our way through this current fiscal storm. Thank you for your patience. Have a good summer.

Sincerely,



Steven Lawrence
Superintendent



Frequently asked questions

Preguntas frequentes