Parents previously afraid to talk openly discuss special ed
SMMUSD HDQTRS A cloud of fear lingered over a group of parents that gathered in the Board of Education meeting room on Wednesday night, cautiously airing their frustrations over a special education program that has come under fire in the past year for an alleged culture of secrecy.
The meeting was the first of four public input sessions held by district consultant Lou Barber & Associates, a Northern California-based firm that was hired late last year to conduct an audit of special education at the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, examining both the financial and programmatic aspects of the controversial program.
“We want to give parents an opportunity to talk about the special education program,” Lou Barber said on Wednesday before the meeting started. “They can say nice things about the program and how wonderful things are going, or they can talk about things that they aren’t happy about.”
Parents have long complained to school officials about the district’s practice of brokering settlement agreements with confidentiality clauses, a process that occurs if previous negotiations over a child’s Individual Education Plan (IEP) — a process that involves a team of special education experts — falls through.
The frustration lies specifically in the settlement proceedings, which many parents allege happens in a hostile environment behind closed doors, one-on-one with one of the senior district officials who would coerce the parents into signing off on an agreement that would shortchange the services their children would receive.
The issue came to a head last year when the City Council threatened to withhold an increase in city funds to the school district unless an independent audit of the special education program was conducted.
The public input session was meant to serve as a safe haven for these parents to present their concerns, speaking out in a meeting that district officials intentionally did not attend to make parents feel more comfortable, according to Barber, who moderated the sessions — three of which were held on Thursday.
But there was still a sense of angst touching on the words of many parents who needed to be assured by Barber on more than one occasion that they or their children would not be placed in a compromising situation by speaking out. Almost all parents chose to leave their names out during the public input session, afraid to have their experiences tied to their names.
“A lot of us have gone through a traumatic experience with our children in special education and it has cost me my health,” one woman said.
Barber said that the district was offering waivers on the confidentiality agreements, allowing parents to speak to the consultant about their experiences.
The parents’ experiences with the special education program varied, some speaking of hostility toward the children exhibited by teachers and in some situations, principals, others talking about unproductive IEP sessions, some even mentioning that their children have been bullied in school and in some cases, gotten physically hurt by other students.
One parent said her daughter was assaulted at school and after school officials failed to punish the offending student, she decided to transfer her child to another public school in the district.
“There was nothing done about it,” the mother said.
What many parents did agree on was that they had lost faith in the district and are basically exhausted.
“We have to fight for everything,” one woman said, her voice quivering. “It’s a hard life, we shouldn’t have to fight for the little things.”
The estimated $79,000 study is meant to examine various aspects of the special education program, among them a financial analysis and whether the practice of confidential settlement agreements is common among other school districts. The audit is scheduled to be available in March.
Barber said the financial portion of the audit is almost completed and is putting together the programmatic pieces.
“The issue related to the confidentiality (agreements) is we’re going to have to proceed with some degree of question as we make sure we don’t have anyone violated in the process,” he said.
School Board member Barry Snell, who observed quietly in the back, thanked the parents for coming out to the meeting, believing that the district is taking a step in the right direction.
“It’s the beginning of us understanding the issues,” he said. “It’s the beginning of a process of making changes.”
While it is unlikely that all of the suggestions in the final report will be executed, the audit will establish a process to begin correcting the concerns of parents, Snell said.
Richard Milanesi, a parent who spoke at the meeting, said he is skeptical that the report will lead to any changes.
“Nothing will change until they fire people,” Milanesi said. “If this were a company and there was this much grumbling, someone’s head would be on the block.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on February 8, 2008. Read the original PDF.