> ## 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. # Special ed costs are on the rise - URL: https://www.smdp.com/special-ed-costs-are-on-the-rise/ - Published: 2008-04-03T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-24T19:08:35.000Z - Author: Melody Hanatani - Tags: Education, Malibu, #archive-import *Consultant puzzled by special ed costs* SMMUSD HDQTRS The price of special education in the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District has grown considerably in the past few years even though the population it serves has declined, according to a report released on Monday. An independent evaluation of the special education program in the public school district, conducted by Lou Barber and Associates, found that expenditures have increased from $16.1 million in the 2001-02 school year to more than $22 million in the current fiscal calendar. The financial analysis — examining revenues, expenditures and general fund contributions for what has become a controversial program in the past year — comes as part of an overall assessment of the special education program. The findings of the report will be presented to the Board of Education at its meeting tonight. The evaluation was made mandatory by the Santa Monica City Council last year in order for the district to receive a nearly $500,000 increase in city aid. Several coun-cilmembers expressed outrage during a confrontational meeting with school officials last year, stating they had received phone calls from parents regarding an alleged culture of fear surrounding settlement agreements and confidentiality clauses related to their children’s Individualized Education Plan, which outlines specialized services that special needs students receive. While the settlement agreements and confidentiality clauses served as the catalyst for the independent evaluation, a substantial portion of the report focused on the financial aspect of the program — where the money comes from and how it is spent. The consultant, Lou Barber, interviewed more than 50 parents, teachers and administrators for the study, finding that though settlement agreements and confidentiality agreements are not illegal, there are concerns due to the frequency they are employed. Aside from critiques relative to the settlement agreements, the evaluation did find that the district provides a full continuum of placement options for special ed students, as well as a wide variety of programs and access to the same books and materials as general education students. The study found that the expenditure growth is directly related to increases in classified and certificated staffing with approximately 20 positions being added in the 2005-06 school year and 26 in 2006-07. “They are more richly staffed with speech therapists and psychologists than the state average,” Barber said in an interview on Wednesday. “They have more administrative support than the state average.” The gap between income and expenditures as related to staffing increases seemed to puzzle the consultants. “That was probably the one piece we looked at that didn’t make as much sense,” Francie Heim, who conducted the financial analysis, said in an interview on Wednesday. The study also found that the district should not change its contracts with outside providers, but the contracts for supplementary services, such as speech and language therapists should be examined to see whether they can be covered by existing staff. Special education funding, which is based on the average daily attendance for the district, is received by the Tri-City Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), of which SMMUSD is a part, and is then distributed to its member districts. The Culver City and Beverly Hills school districts are also members of the Tri-City SELPA. The SMMUSD represents about 50 percent of the total average daily attendance for the SELPA. The study found that the district spent 57 percent more than it received in special education funding in the 2001-02 school year, though that number isn’t nearly as high as the 98 percent expected in 2007-08. “Put another way, the district expenditures as a percentage of income were 158 percent more in 2001-02, and they are now almost 200 percent of income,” Barber states in the report. The unfunded cost of the special ed program is also considerably higher than the state average — SMMUSD unfunded cost ratio was 41 percent in the 2004-05 school year, as compared to 25 percent for the state. “This translates to a difference of approximately $3 million,” Barber said. Those numbers came as a surprise to school board President Oscar de la Torre, who said on Tuesday that he was under the impression that costs had been going down. “I was made to believe that our cost in special education was decreasing or that people had put in cost cutting measures,” de la Torre said.“In the report, it shows that our student population in special ed has decreased but our cost have increased, and not by a little.” Paul Silvern, the chair of the Financial Oversight Committee, said on Wednesday that he was pleased a funding component was incorporated into the study, adding that the FOC had been interested in exploring the issue further for quite some time. “We have a long-standing interest of having a better understanding of detail of special ed expenditures beyond some information we generally receive from staff,” Silvern, who had not yet looked at the study, said. “We never felt we had a complete picture of all expenditures and had hoped this report would provide more detail.” *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 3, 2008.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/040308.pdf?ref=smdp.com)