> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# NoCal firm could settle sticky issue
- URL: https://www.smdp.com/nocal-firm-could-settle-sticky-issue/
- Published: 2007-12-04T16:00:00.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-24T04:12:45.000Z
- Author: Melody Hanatani
- Tags: Education, Santa Monica, #archive-import

*Special education audit projected to cost district $79,000*

SMMUSD HDQTRS A Northern California-based educational consulting firm could be tapped to head the public school district’s independent audit of the special education program that has drawn criticism from parents and the Santa Monica City Council because of a confidentiality clause in settlement agreements.

An ad-hoc committee charged with finding an independent consultant to review the district’s special education program will recommend that the Board of Education hire Lou Barber & Associates of El Dorado Hills at its meeting on Dec. 13\. On Monday, the committee — which includes district administrators, special education instructors, parents and members of the Special Education District Advisory Committee — interviewed three candidates that responded to the district’s Request for Qualifications, including Irvine-based Total School Solutions, Sacramento-based School Services and Lou Barber & Associates, ultimately agreeing on Lou Barber for the firm’s experience in special education and settlement agreements.

The decision eventually came down to Lou Barber & Associates and School Services, each offering varying levels of expertise in the two major areas of the audit — the programmatic and financial aspects of the special ed program. Committee members felt Lou Barber had more expertise in the programmatic areas of special education — particularly with regard to settlement agreements and Individualized Education Plans — but held less strength in finances. School Services on the other hand seemed to hold an edge when it came to understanding finances but did not have an in-house staff member that specialized in the programmatic aspect of special education, which meant the firm would have had to hire a consultant.

As a result, the committee voted 7-5 in favor of Lou Barber because the focus of the audit would be on the settlement agreements, though the committee members agreed they would be fine with either candidate.

“The main reason I favored Lou Barber is because of the vast experience in working in numerous areas of special education, including at the state level,” said Lee Jones, who is the co-chair of the Special Education District Advisory Committee.

The audit is being conducted as stipulated by the City Council in order for the district to receive a $530,000 increase in city aid. The council requested the school board conduct a comprehensive assessment of its program after several parents of special education children raised concerns of so-called secret deals that they said barred them from speaking to a third party about the services their child received.

The district has come under fire by parents and several members of SEDAC in the past few years about the practice of confidentiality clauses in settlement agreements for special education students. The contentious issue has fueled parents’ distrust of the district.

Before the ad hoc committee convened the interviews, Superintendent Dianne Talarico assured committee members that the audit will be a truly independent process, ensuring that the consultants would have access to all documents it requests, including the settlement agreements.

“This will be an objective process, I’ll see to it personally,” Talarico said.

Some committee members were concerned that there wasn’t language in the RFQ that required the consultants to review the settlement agreements. Committee member John Petz said because there is a sense of distrust,people will be looking for some reassurance in writing.

Since the RFQ could not be altered by the committee, Talarico said she would write a letter to the consultant asking they do an in depth analysis of the settlement agreements.

The consultant’s proposal is estimated to cost about $79,000 and is projected to be completed by March 2008.

*Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on December 4, 2007.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/120407.pdf?ref=smdp.com)