Management Review - Special Education Services

MANAGEMENT
and

OPERATIONAL
REVIEW

SOUTH KITSAP SCHOOL DISTRICT
Special Education Services

SPRING 2017

Washington Association of School Administrators
825 Fifth Avenue SE, Olympia WA 98501



SOUTH KITSAP SCHOOL DISTRICT
MANAGEMENT REVIEW
Special Education Services

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 1

ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL REVIEW PROCESS 1

II. THE FOUR PHASES OF A MANAGEMENT REVIEW 2

III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
AREAS OF FOCUS 3

IV. MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM 5

V. LOGISTICS OF THE REVIEW 6
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED 6
THOSE INTERVIEWED 6
OVERALL OBSERVATIONS 7

VI. THE REPORT 8
OVERVIEW 8
PROCESS 8
COMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
SECTION 1: SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES 9
SECTION 2: GOVERNANCE, VISION, AND LEADERSHIP 15
SECTION 3: RELATIONSHIPS AND COMMUNICATION 18
SECTION 4: FINANCES 19

SPECIAL THANKS

A special thanks to the South Kitsap School District administrators, staff, and community
members for their hospitality and assistance during the WASA team’s visitation. District

leaders, staff, and the community showed a genuine willingness to support the review process

in the interest of improvement, transparency, and communication.

I. INTRODUCTION

ABOUT THE MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL REVIEW PROCESS
The Washington Association of School Administrators (WASA) was contacted by the South
Kitsap School District regarding the possibility of carrying out an evaluative study of the
district’s management and operations utilizing the Management Review format developed by
WASA. Following discussions with the superintendent, the district determined to have a review
carried out in the spring of 2017. The review was designed to focus on the district’s special
education services.

There will be readers of this report for whom the approach used in this kind of study may be
unfamiliar—the following initial section (The Four Phases of a Management Review) is included
as an introduction to the design of a review. A Management Review is intended to provide an
objective look at the current operational effectiveness of a district’s focus area(s) and to produce
a report that the district can utilize in planning for the future. WASA has developed the approach
over a 25-year period and carried out more than 172 studies in Washington and other states.

A review may be designed to address all major programs in a district or be focused upon a
narrower program area. In this case, the South Kitsap School District was interested in a review
covering the district’s special education services

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 1

II. THE FOUR PHASES OF A MANAGEMENT REVIEW

PREPARATION
The initial portion of the review is that of planning. A plan is developed in concert with the
school district that includes the specific goals and objectives sought. A review team is
cooperatively selected and orientation for the team members provided. A meeting is held with
key school district personnel to provide accurate input for the team and an introduction to what
the review will involve for district employees.

ANALYSIS
The analysis phase involves the onsite activity by the review team. Information is collected in the
form of relevant school district policies, reports, documents, etc. In addition, interviews are
conducted with administrators, staff members, board members, and other district employees as
appropriate. Where possible, there are observations of actual activities within the school system.

EVALUATION
An evaluation of the documentation, interviews, observations, and other information takes place
next. This involves the members of the team in collective discussion and independent writing.
The review is captured in a report that provides a comprehensive description of district functions
with specific findings and recommendations.

REPORTING
The final report is presented personally to the superintendent and board of directors, if desired,
and the recommendations for improvement are explained. The report, in its entirety, provides a
springboard for planning and positive direction for the school system. Each report is prepared in
such a way that the positive strengths of the school district are acknowledged.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 2

III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

AREAS OF FOCUS
The review team has made specific recommendations for each of the four areas of focus, which are
summarized below.

SECTION 1: SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES

Key Recommendations:
1. With the current growth, the district has a good opportunity to look at reconfiguring and relocating

some special education programs. It appears that some programs could be combined or collapsed.
The district should move cautiously and strategically to take into consideration staff and
community investments in existing locations and service delivery models.
2. Develop a multi-year action plan to reduce the number and types of self-contained programs, and
move toward student-needs oriented classrooms.
3. Develop a communication plan to share with stakeholders.
4. The district should consider developing district systems for intervention to develop more
understanding of how students would qualify for services, and to establish clear processes for
talking about student issues with systems/tiers of support in place. The district is encouraged to
develop and implement an MTSS/RTI model that develops ownership by all staff for all students.
5. Provide professional development specifically tailored to the needs of special education staff.
6. Clear and consistent entrance and exit criteria for Speech and Language Services need to be
adhered to across the district. Tracking and monthly reporting will help the district gain insight
into why the percentage is high.
7. The district should institute a process which includes the review of student performance data to
determine if the current model is meeting the learning needs of students and that students are
progressing in the general education setting with state standards. The district could consider
establishing a related process for reviewing evaluation reports, which could include a peer review.

SECTION 2: GOVERNANCE, VISION, AND LEADERSHIP

Key Recommendations:
1. There should be a review and exploration of opportunities to revise and reduce the responsibility

of the Office of Special Services administrators, and to consider an increase in the amount of
administrative support.
2. The department is advised to develop a system for updating department procedures, practices, and
protocols with the involvement of staff.
3. It is recommended that the department convene a stakeholders group to clarify issues and
processes for school administrators.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 3

SECTION 3: RELATIONSHIPS AND COMMUNICATION

Key Recommendations:
1. Special education administration should strive to improve communication throughout the

department, especially timely communication, availability to attend meetings, and to assist
staff in addressing issues.
2. The department should work to develop clear communication protocols, which are easily
understood and widely distributed. These should be included and updated as part of a
department reference manual. Attention should be given to providing a rationale for decisions
whenever feasible.

SECTION 4: FINANCES

Key Recommendations:
1. It is recommended that the district develop clear expectations and a list of adopted/recommended

materials for each type of educational program, and ensure that every program has the materials
needed to meet the instructional needs of its students.
2. It would be helpful to share information relative to allocations and purchasing procedures for
classroom budgets, resource materials, technology, and basic supplies with administration and
staff.
3. Special services programs will need to be considered when the district moves forward with
capital projects planning and implementation.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 4

IV. MANAGEMENT REVIEW TEAM

KATHY EHMAN, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Ms. Ehman is currently serving as the Assistant Superintendent for the Arlington Public Schools.
Her general leadership responsibilities include oversight of the district’s special services
programs. Before coming to Arlington in 2016, she led special education and several categorical
programs in the Puyallup School District. Prior to joining Puyallup’s leadership team in 2012, she
served the Sedro-Woolley School District as assistant superintendent and executive director of
Special Programs for a total of fifteen years. She has also held leadership and teaching positions
in the Meridian, Burlington-Edison, and Lake Washington school districts as well as similar roles
in California, Idaho, and Michigan. She also served as a member of the Western Washington
University Educational Administration Professional Education Advisory Board and as an active
WASA member.

DENNIS MATHEWS, RETIRED SPECIAL EDUCATION ADMINISTRATOR
Mr. Mathews is recently retired from the position of associate superintendent in Educational
Service District 112, Vancouver, Washington, a position he held from 1993 to 2013. He has also
served the Educational Service District as a special education supervisor and as an administrative
assistant. Prior to joining ESD 112, he served the Richland and Kennewick School Districts as a
school psychologist. Mr. Mathews has just retired from public education with 38 years of service,
all in special education leadership and service roles. He has also been very active in several
regional and state professional associations and has been a team member on multiple special
education review projects.

JENNIFER TRAUFLER, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT, STUDENT SUPPORT
SERVICES, TACOMA PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Jennifer Traufler is currently the Assistant Superintendent of Student Support Services, Tacoma
Public Schools. She has also held special services leadership positions in Auburn, Enumclaw, and
Wenatchee spanning the past 15 years. Prior to her administrative service, she taught special
education for five years in Eastern Washington. She is an active WASA member and has held
several key roles with the Urban Special Education Leadership Collaboration and the state Safety
Net Oversight Committee.

DR. WAYNE ROBERTSON, EDUCATIONAL CONSULTANT
Dr. Robertson is the former superintendent of the Edmonds, Lakewood, and Conway school
districts, as well as a former administrator and teacher in the Lake Stevens and Richland school
districts. He served the Lake Stevens School District as director of Special Programs for nine
years and taught special education for five years before becoming an administrator. He is
currently an educational leadership faculty member at Western Washington University where he
coordinates the Superintendent Certification Program. He also serves and supports school districts
and WASA as a private educational consultant as a managing partner in the firm Principled
Leadership Consulting. His educational doctorate degree is from the University of Washington.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 5

V. LOGISTICS OF THE REVIEW

The plan for a review as outlined above involved the examination and study of documentary
information as well as the onsite interviews of many people involved in the school district. The
Director of Special Services, in preparation for the review, compiled an extensive portfolio of
documents for each team member. The list below represents a sample of the information
requested for examination and reviewed for this project:

DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
• Special Education Enrollment Reports and Records and Eligibility Determination Data
• Special Education Discipline Data
• Programs, Services Descriptions and Locations
• Department Staffing Data
• Budget Detail
• Student Assessment Summary Data
• List of District and Learning Support Services Department Staff Assignments
• Collective Bargaining Agreements
• Enrollment Projections
• Least Restrictive Environment Summary Data
• Citizen Complaint Documents
• Professional Development Calendar and Materials
• Board Report Materials
• District Newsletters
• Program Placement Data

THOSE INTERVIEWED
The plan for the review included interviews with the following individuals:

• Board of Directors
• Superintendent
• Assistant Superintendents
• Director of Special Education
• Assistant Director of Special Education
• District-Level Administrators and Select District Office Support Staff
• Union and Employee Group Leaders
• Principals and Assistant Principals, Dean of Students
• Teachers and Teachers on Special Assignment
• School Psychologists, Occupational Therapists, Speech Language Pathologists
• School Counselors
• Support Staff Representing the District Office
• Special Education Paraeducators

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 6

OVERALL OBSERVATIONS
The information gathered from the materials studied as well as that gained in the interview process
was synthesized into the report that follows.

One overriding characteristic of the school district, which emerged from the review process, was
an obvious focus on providing high-quality and support opportunities for students and helping
students achieve academic success. The people involved with the school system and the Office of
Special Services share a strong commitment to student success; and it shows in many efforts that
are evident in classrooms, administrative offices, support services, and at the board of directors’
level. The South Kitsap School District has many positive attributes—the fact that the
superintendent, leadership team, staff, and community were interested in this kind of assessment
is a testimony to the district’s dedication to build upon the already strong foundation.

The South Kitsap School District Office of Special Services receives strong district support, and
in many respects, is technically well managed. This was evident from the interviews conducted
and materials reviewed. The district enjoys a tradition of strong support for students and their
work. The community takes pride in the schools and treats the school facilities as central to the
identity of the community represented and served by the district.

The overall impression gained by the Management Review Team is that the South Kitsap School
District is dedicated to student growth and success. The community and district staff members
care greatly about the students and those who serve them. The administration, staff, and
community deserve credit for bringing an interest in continued improvement to the forefront. This
study is built upon a recognition that the South Kitsap School District is functioning with
evidence of success and prudent management.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 7

VI. THE REPORT

OVERVIEW
The superintendent, district administrators, and other leaders met and discussed the areas of focus,
which would guide the review process. The superintendent contacted WASA and discussed
options for the review and potential team members. A determination was made that the review
would be conducted in the spring with a report to be issued later in the spring of 2017. The district
was most interested in a review that could guide short-term decision making and future planning.
A lead consultant for the review was selected in March of 2017, and planning moved very quickly
to assemble the team and schedule the onsite and document preparation steps of the review
process. Given the complexity of the district’s special education system in terms of enrollment,
demographics, and finances, it was determined that three special education directors would be
necessary to fully review the South Kitsap School District’s special education program, which is
part of the Office of Special Services.

PROCESS
In March of 2017, the consultant conferred with the superintendent to discuss issues, possible
focus areas of a review, logistics, and the calendar. The details of the proposed review were
discussed and decisions were made as to the involvement of district personnel, parents, and
community members who should be involved and materials to be gathered and prepared.

Shortly after this communication, the consultant and WASA representatives began assembling the
review team. It was important to have representation of experienced special education
administrators from large- or medium-sized districts. The superintendent and the district staff
developed an interview schedule and began assembling documents in preparation for the onsite
portion of the review.

The district expressed an interest in having the process be thorough, inclusive, and transparent.

In preparation for the onsite portion of the review, several contacts were made between the
consultant and district staff to discuss various details of the review, particularly the interview
activities and format of the interviews. Onsite interviews were scheduled for April 12–13, 2017,
to take place in the South Kitsap School District Administration Building. Visits to school sites
and special education classrooms were arranged as part of the review team’s scheduled time in the
district. Over the course of the two days, the four team members conducted 79 face-to-face
meetings and interviews involving approximately 80 staff members. In addition to the sessions at
the district offices, team members visited Manchester Elementary School, Burley Glenwood
Elementary School, Mullenix Ridge Elementary School, Olalla Elementary School, Hidden Creek
Elementary School, East Port Orchard Elementary School, Cedar Heights Middle School, Marcus
Whitman Junior High School, John Sedgewick Junior High School, and South Kitsap High
School. It was equally important to offer those providing special education services in the district
with the opportunity to participate, as well as those who were recipients of or partners in the
provision of special education services.

Most of the interviews were one to one, although a few small group sessions were held. Issues of
confidentiality were reviewed so that interview participants were free and safe with their

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 8

comments. For the most part, interviews were loosely structured and staff and others brought
forth comments important to them.

In addition to the above detailed interviews, over the course of the two onsite days, the lead
consultant conducted an additional nineteen interviews as part of a separate review. During these
interviews with district-level leadership team personnel, various aspects of special education were
discussed.

At the end of the day on April 13, 2017, the review team held a brief exit session with the
superintendent and assistant superintendent.

On April 27, 2017, the South Kitsap Education Association president and the lead consultant held
a telephone interview to follow up on some specific points and suggestions.

COMMENDATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SECTION 1: SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS, AND SERVICES
The district and the Office of Special Services are to be commended for the establishment and
support of a comprehensive special services system. South Kitsap’s student enrollment is just
under 10,000 students with a 13.5 percent special education population. The district provides a
wide variety of programs across the district servicing 1,562 students in special education as of
March 2017.

The Birth to 2 population is served by an outside community provider. School-age students are
primarily served in-district with a few out-of-district placements for specific needs.

The special education program is overseen by one special education director and one assistant
director who are in their second year in these positions

Commendations:
1. Both the assistant director and director are clearly committed to serving students and

providing high-quality programs.
2. The district’s students benefit greatly from a skilled, professional, dedicated, and caring staff.
3. There is strong use of data in looking systemically at students, programs, and services.
4. Applying for Safety Net funding for “community impact” as well as “high-cost students” will

help to financially support the program and is a substantial undertaking.
5. The district provides a late start Wednesday for collaboration time which is essential to

support and provide time for RTI/MTSS efforts and to strengthen the district’s overall focus
on student achievement. There are monthly collaboration opportunities across the district for
special education staff.
6. There are strong connections among ESA groups and collegial support for each other.
7. The special education staff members appreciate the strong support of the building and district-
level administration in both instructional support and operational support.
8. There have been many recent successes in moving EBD students out of special education and
into the general education settings.
9. The district’s special education dropout rate is below the state average for students with
disabilities.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 9

10. Inclusion opportunities for students with special needs are increasing and are even being
initiated by general education teachers.

11. Improvements have been made to the overall assessment system.
12. Staff members are becoming more comfortable with the IEP online system.
13. The districtwide Summer Institute is a successful professional development initiative.
14. The Manchester Autism Preschool partnership with ECEAP is quite successful.
15. The department has been quite accommodating in flexibly assigning paraeducators to meet

student needs.

Recommendations:
1. Programs: Clearly, with the growth South Kitsap is experiencing, this would be a good

opportunity to look at reconfiguring and relocating some special education programs. Due
to space issues, there are some schools that house no self-contained programs, while other
schools have multiple self-contained programs. It appears that some of the smaller schools
have higher numbers of programs. One elementary school has so many self-contained
programs that their percentage of special education students constitutes 30 percent of their
enrollment. Space continues to be an issue, causing some special education teachers to
teach in hallways. The district boundary review process should alleviate some of this
inequity across the district.

In speaking with multiple staff and in visiting some of the programs, it appears that some
of these programs could be combined or collapsed. There are two different Life Skills
programs. The possibility of integrating the higher ability students in the Academic AAA
program into the Resource Room should be considered. This would better serve these
students from the perspective of LRE and RTI/MTSS. Inclusive practices across the
district should be assessed for consistency.

Another program that received lots of conversation was the KIT program. It is not clear
how students become eligible for this program. There were concerns raised regarding not
having clear behavior plans for the students in these programs and how their
social/emotional needs were being met. Staff and administrators indicated that the KIT
program is where challenging students are sent, in part, as relief for the general education
setting. If this perception is accurate, general education staff, or possibly all staff, need
more training on how to address behavior management concerns and how to put positive
behavior supports into place in the classroom. The purpose behind the KIT program needs
to be explored. The needs of these students should be able to be addressed in a different
setting if supports are put in place for them and training is provided for staff.

It was shared that the current preschool programs have very little or no typically
developing peers in their program which puts the district in jeopardy for compliance with
LRE. Whether adding tuition-based students or coordinating with ECEAP or Head Start
for integration, it would be worth exploring some options to alleviate the segregation
issue, and more importantly, to provide these children contact with typically developing
children.

Additional recommendations related to program placements include the following:

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 10

• Develop a multi-year action plan to reduce the number and types of self-contained
programs, shifting away from program specific classrooms to student needs oriented
classrooms.

• Develop a communication plan to share with stakeholders.
• Provide professional development to all staff on differentiation to meet the needs of all

students.
• Consider adding preschool classes in the elementary school. This could mean moving

some classes to neighborhood schools or at least regionally. This would reduce
transportation costs, support feeder patterns, and development relationship between
staff and families, as well as staff to staff to promote smooth transitions from
preschool to kindergarten.
• Explore ways to incorporate typically developing preschoolers into existing preschool
programs. Peers as role models will develop the skills of disabled preschoolers in
preparation of kindergarten.
• Explore the efficacy of serving all medically fragile students at the high school.
Review how students can be included with typical peers.

2. Least Restrictive Environment: The current placement configuration does not provide
services for all students in every school or at least in every feeder pattern. Students are not
attending their neighborhood schools with their nondisabled peers at what appears to be
high rates. This feeds into exclusion as well, and it has a negative impact on social
interactions and families, bus rides are longer, and transportation cost are increased. See
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) below.

Least restrictive environment. WAC 392-172A-02050. Subject to the exceptions for
students in adult correctional facilities, school districts shall ensure that the provision
of services to each student eligible for special education, including preschool students
and students in public or private institutions or other care facilities, shall be provided:
(1) To the maximum extent appropriate in the general education environment with
students who are nondisabled; and (2) Special classes, separate schooling or other
removal of students eligible for special education from the general educational
environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that
education in general education classes with the use of supplementary aids and services
cannot be achieved satisfactorily.

Placements. WAC 392-172A-02060 (3). Unless the IEP of a student requires some
other arrangement, the student shall be educated in the school that he or she would
attend if nondisabled. In the event the student needs other arrangements, placement
shall be as close as possible to the student's home.

Students with disabilities and in need of special education are not simply placed based on
their disability or the characteristics of that disability. Student needs are identified by way
of the assessment process, an IEP is developed, placement follows where the IEP can best
be implemented, and the student can progress in the least restrictive and the most inclusive
environment.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 11

The district is strongly advised to review program locations and seek opportunities for
adjustments. The grade changes processes and boundary review activities may provide
some opportunities for adjustments. The district should move cautiously and strategically
to not ignore staff and community investments in the current location and service delivery
models.

3. Students With Behavioral Issues: Beyond types and number of programs and their
placement within schools, district systems for intervention is another area for
consideration. In listening to principals, teachers, paras, and ESAs, one theme that
continued to rise to the surface was the number of students with challenging behaviors and
social emotional issues. There does not appear to be a districtwide focus on RTI or the
consistent use of Child Study teams. Having clear processes for talking about student
issues, having systems/tiers of support in place, and an understanding of how students
would qualify for services, would help alleviate confusion and misunderstanding as it
relates to special education and/or general education supports. Special education should
not be the default mechanism for the lack of RTI supports. One other related suggestion
that might help serve this area of concern would be to look at hiring/adding a behavioral
specialist. These professionals are specifically trained to help analyze behaviors and to
help develop plans to mitigate them. This support would be a great resource to teams and
the district in helping keep students in the mainstream and not referring them to special
education. They would be a vital part of any Child Study or RTI/MSTT team.

4. Professional Development: Another area that all groups advocated for was more
professional development that was specifically tailored to the needs of special education
staff. This included training for both new teachers and veteran teachers. It was shared that
there was summer training, but that much of it did not pertain to special education. If
strands relating to special education during the summer training could be added, it would
benefit not only the special education staff but also the general education staff. In
conjunction with curriculum adoptions, some staff indicated that they were not included in
professional development that goes along with these new adoptions. It will be very
important for special education staff to be included to support their students with the new
materials.

Provide professional development to all staff on differentiation to meet the needs of all
students.

Teachers and paraeducators also noted the need for paraeducators to receive more and
better training, particularly when new materials are added to a classroom program.

It appears as if the district needs to be more systematic in assessing professional
development needs for all staff and in designing and implementing a variety of training
programs to meet the highest priority identified needs.

Resources: Differentiation • http://www.ascd.org/research-a-
topic/differentiated-instructionresources.aspx

Online PD modules • http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 12

5. Speech and Language Services: One area of continued review should be Speech and
Language Services. The percentage of communication only students is extremely high.
There needs to be clear and consistent entrance and exit criteria that is adhered to across
the district. At 19.37 percent, compared to the state average of 15.6 percent, this could be
a contributing factor as to why the overall special education percentage is at 13.47 percent.
The minutes and types of services should be reviewed with the eye on meaningful
program, educational impact, age appropriateness, and to determine if services can be
integrated and delivered in the natural classroom environment. Tracking the number of
students qualifying by building/program and reporting monthly will assist in seeing the
bigger picture and give insight into what may be causing this high percentage.

In the realm of high percentages, due to the 13.47 percent special education rate, the
district is not able to capture funding over 12.7 percent. Although this is only .77 percent
over the loss in state revenue for these approximately 76 students exceed $400,000.00.
Examining not only the SLP numbers, but systematically reviewing the eligibility process
and implementing a RTI/MSTT system that supports students, is strongly recommended.
Ownership for students should be by ALL staff where differentiation of instruction and
supports are in place to address the academic and behavioral needs. Buildings need to
embrace that ALL students are their students, and to best serve ALL students, the district
needs to share that responsibility.

The district leadership is aware of these issues and will need to proceed cautiously in
sharing data, creating processes for reviewing, discussing, and planning before
implementing changes. The district will need to be respectful of the historical and cultural
aspects of staffing and service-delivery systems which have been in place for some time.

Additional recommendations related to this situation might include the following:
• Create a standard system for tracking and reporting each month.
• Review data with SLPs regarding the students receiving speech services.
• Consider working with an outside consultant with SLP expertise to review practices

and develop strategies and alternatives.

6. Instructional Materials: Many teachers reported lacking the instructional materials
necessary to meet the needs of their students. Some reported having out-of-date hand-me-
downs or materials that were inappropriate for the instructional needs of the students.
Special education teachers reported a desire to be directed to the most effective
instructional materials, supported in the purchase of these materials for their students, and
trained to implement the materials. Teachers reported a desire for their paraeducators to
receive the training as well for optimal implementation with fidelity. Teachers reported
that resource programs have more access than self-contained programs. Teachers in self-
contained programs reported needing updated training and materials on autism as well as
other program specifics to address the unique learning needs of their students. It was
reported that elementary resource teachers tend to have better materials and access than
teachers at the secondary level and all self-contained programs regardless of level. This is
typical and can be address through a process to ensure teachers have what they need to
help every student grow.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 13

7. Pre-Referral Process/Interventions: Staff and administration desire a consistently
implemented pre-referral and intervention process across the district, with direction
provided from the district. This system should provide consistency but should also allow
for some autonomy at the building level. The March 1220 reports 13.5 percent of the
district student population identified as special education eligible. This over identification
negatively impacts the finances of the district and calls for the need for an intervention
system. This can also result in a lack of ownership from general education staff.

Additionally, the over-reliance on self-contained classrooms contributes to the belief
system. The district has failed to meet the target for Table 3 Least Restrictive Environment
(LRE) for the last three years, and it consistently runs rates of exclusion from the general
education program higher than the state average. The unintended consequences of a long-
standing practice of excluding students with disabilities from core instruction contributes
to some teachers becoming de-skilled in the process. The district is encouraged to develop
and implement a MTSS/RTI model that develops ownership by all staff for all students,
where all staff are skilled in differentiating instruction and tiered supports are in place to
support student needs, academically, and behaviorally. The development and
implementation should be shared by the teaching and learning director and special
education director.

Resources: MTSS/RTI
• http://k12.wa.us/MTSS/default.aspx
• http://www.florida-rti.org/
• http://www.kansasmtss.org/
• https://mtss.madison.k12.wi.us/
• http://www.rtinetwork.org/essential/tieredinstruction/tieredinstruction-and-

intervention-rti-model
• http://www.rti4success.org/

8. Substitute Staffing: Staff and principals reported a lack sufficient substitutes to cover
absences for teachers and paraeducators. It was reported that often the instructional
specialists are subbing, and therefore, unavailable to support the needs in classrooms to
improve student learning. This was communicated as a significant loss of a valued
instructional resource. The district might consider hiring floating substitutes for special
education teachers and paraeducators. When not needed to substitute, the floaters could be
assigned in key classrooms of need.

9. Evaluation Process: There appears to be a lack of consistency in the evaluation process
from school to school and perhaps from staff member to staff member. This may result in
inequitable access to services or conversely an over-identification of students, which can
negatively impact a student’s participation in the general education setting. It was reported
that evaluations were randomly reviewed in the past as a means of monitoring practice of
teams. Some staff reported that they would be open to a peer review process which could
serve as training and consistency. The number of professional judgment decisions for
evaluation teams remained a question. This situation should be reviewed by the
department leadership in conjunction with the assessment staff.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 14

The district should also institute a process which includes the review of student
performance data to determine if the current model is meeting the learning needs of
students and students are progressing in the general education setting with the state
standards. Related to this item, the district could consider establishing a process for
reviewing evaluation reports, which could include a peer review. Consider previewing all
proposed eligibility decisions based on professional judgment with teams prior to the
evaluation meeting.

10. Staffing: Staffing ratios were identified as a concern by many staff for the K-12 resource
rooms, citing caseload numbers. Staff perceive a shortage of teachers. Anecdotal reports
from teachers would suggest that there may be incidences where staffing ratios are
exceeded. Clearly, this is a bargaining issue and is beyond the scope of this review. There
are processes in place at the district level to ensure that bargained staffing ratios are
maintained.

SECTION 2: GOVERNANCE, VISION, AND LEADERSHIP
The Office of Special Services is led by a director with the support of an assistant director. The
director reports to the executive director of Teaching & Learning. The district website features
key information about the department, designed to inform and welcome parents and provide
access to the information needed by parents and staff members. Key compliance documents and
information are also made available via the website. The work of the department is based on the
following set of beliefs:
• Well-trained staff have the expertise and ability to develop quality instructional programs

based on individual student strengths and needs.
• Quality instructional programs are based upon best practices research.
• Families are valuable partners in the educational process.
• Inclusive educational practices better prepare students to be valued in society as adults.
• A variety of resources are necessary to assist staff in developing programs to meet student

needs.
• Quality instructional programs meet local, state, and federal compliance standards.

The Office of Special Services in any district is one of the most complex systems, providing a
wide range of special education and related services to the district’s students with the greatest
need. The department is constantly balancing the needs of students and staff with budget, and
logistical and regulatory constraints. In South Kitsap, the following programs are offered and
supported by this department:
• Birth to 2 Years Services
• Preschool
• Early Childhood Autism Program
• Resource Support
• Life Skills
• Skills Classroom
• Medically Fragile
• Triple A or Achieving Academic Abilities
• KIT or Kids in Transition
• Special Education Related Services

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 15

• Community Transition Program
• Options

These programs are provided at varying sites across the district. Transportation is provided, which
involves considerable coordination with parents, school personnel, department staff, and the
district transportation department.

The challenges facing this department are essentially the same as any large, progressive district
trying to meet the needs of children and families, provide support to staff, and manage the legal
and compliance standards of the varying programs. Facilities issues challenge this department to
the same extent that they do the general education program. The department has a very close
working relationship with the schools and all district office departments.

In terms of organization, the department appears to be well-supported by the director and assistant
director. There may be some ambiguity as to how the administrative responsibilities are shared by
the two administrators, but to some extent, they are still developing their working relationship and
systems. The reporting relationship as part of Teaching and Learning is intended to minimize the
separation between special education and general education and is in the best interests of the
students and staff.

Commendations:
1. The district is to be commended for its strong support of this department, the staff, and

students.
2. The department is led and staffed by skilled, dedicated, and caring professionals.
3. The director and assistant director show great respect for the personnel and the work of the

department.
4. The department is well connected to the leadership work of the district and have ready access

to the superintendent and other cabinet-level decision makers.
5. The director and assistant director appear to have positive working relationships with other

district officials who interact with the services provided within the Office of Special Services.

Recommendations:
1. Administrative Capacity: Leadership was recognized for dealing with a significant level

of staff turnover in one year. Given staff turnover and the fact that the director is relatively
new to the administration of a complex special education program, there are some
understandable gaps in communication and clarification of roles and responsibilities. The
department is advised to take a breath and slow down the pace a bit. There should be a
review and exploration of opportunities to revise and reduce the responsibility of the
Office of Special Services administrators, specifically with respect to evaluation and
supervision of preschool personnel, CPS reports for preschool, and IEP writing for
positions without staffing (teletherapy and emergency certs). There may also be a need for
the district to consider an increase in the number of administrative or technical support
staff in the Office of Special Services. Many district and department staff members
interviewed reported feeling that they recognize how stretched the leaders are and
understand that there are processes that they must follow. Apparently, this department
used to have more administrative support which was reduced due to budget constraints;
and in recent years, the department and the complexity and demands of the work have

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 16

increased. In some nearby districts, the leadership of special services is held at an
Executive Director level. This warrants review of other district priorities, needs, and
available resources.

2. Procedures: Some staff reported difficulty with procedures in the last year. Some
members miss having hard copies of procedures. Others reported not being able to locate
procedures to refer to when needed and some report a desire to having a system of
updating procedures with staff input and participation. Involvement of staff in the
updating of procedures and organizational materials could help with communication, both
within the department and externally. The department is advised to develop a system for
updating department procedures, practices, and protocols with the involvement of staff.
Procedural guidelines are found on the district server, but the district should consider ways
to better communicate this with staff.

Some administrators stated that they did not know how placement processes are supposed
to work. They sometimes observed that the decisions of the qualified professionals—the
evaluation teams, and IEP teams—were overruled by building administration. For
example, a situation where the student was not recommended for special education but
was placed in special education before an evaluation or IEP was developed. It should be
made clear that the IEP team determines needs and then placement after the IEP is
developed. The principal should not be making the final placement decision. It should be
noted that this is not viewed as a common occurrence.

3. Common Direction and Focus: Many principals reported a desire for common direction
and focus communicated to them, so they can better support staff, students, and families.
This is not unique to the South Kitsap School District Office of Student Services. It
appears that the current mission and vision of the Office of Special Services, though
helpful, does not provide enough focus and specificity to enable the school leaders and
staff to make day-to-day decisions with the assurance that they need. Very likely, issues
such as inclusion, least restrictive environment, interventions prior to assessment, and
perhaps staffing and resource allocations, need to be clarified. The department would be
well-served by convening a stakeholders group and setting positions on these and other
matters. This may take the form of a strategic planning exercise, or it could be an on-going
advisory group, or some other structure. Principal and staff voice in these processes from
the outset would be critical to the success of the effort.

4. Administrative Roles and Responsibilities: The director and assistant director divide
and share field duties. The director manages elementary program supports and supervises
school psychologists, preschool staff, and additional para support. The assistant director
manages secondary program support, and supervises speech and language pathologists and
occupational therapists. In-office duties such as budgeting, staffing, placements, service
contacts, hiring, compliance, and reports—although there is support from the assistant
director, office staff, and part-time instructional specialists—appear to have been accepted
by or fallen to the director. All special education teachers and classroom paraeducators,
except preschool, are managed, supervised, and evaluated by their building administrators.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 17

5. Decision Making: According to most of the building and related services special
education staff, the common perception is that most decisions are channeled through the
director. This means that decisions can be delayed until addressed by the director. More
than half the staff interviewed intimated that decision turn-around time to receive answers
or feedback regarding their issue takes too long or in a few cases there was no response at
all. Consequently, special education staff suggests that decision making needs
improvements.

Another aspect for decisions not getting made in a timely manner is the hiring timeline.
Staff asked why a simple post for a new hire or replacement position should take weeks or
months. Furthermore, some staff expressed and special education administration agreed
that they knew in advance that a replacement would be needed, but the process still took
too long. Staff are interested in knowing how the process from request to post to fill could
be expedited without eliminating essential requirements.

The department needs to explore and support processes that deal with requests or issues in
a timely manner. Routine requests or issues that can be dealt with right away should be
dealt with directly, or delegated to technical support staff. Issues that should require
research and/or resources require that the person making the request be informed as to
what the steps are and how long the process will take.

6. Direct, Personal Communication: It may help to reduce emails and voice mail to visit
buildings. Conversations are best. Listen to what’s on the minds of all special education
staff. Be ready to share what’s happening inside and outside the district. Hear something
that needs to be fixed, get on it.

SECTION 3: RELATIONSHIPS AND COMMUNICATION

Commendations:
1. The director and assistant director are aware of some communications issues and are open to

hearing suggestions for improvement.

2. District-level leaders feel that the communication and working relationships with the Office of
Special Services leadership and staff are strong. They recognize the complexities of special
services and the need for on-going communication and positive approaches to problem
solving, which go hand in hand with serving a diverse and challenging student population.

Recommendations:
1. Improved Communication: Several staff reported a need for improved communication

throughout the department. For special education administration, specifically, timely
communication and availability to attend meetings as well as meet when requested to
assist staff in addressing issues. It was reported that often special education administrators
are double-booked. Most likely, given recent reductions of administrative staffing
throughout the district, this situation may exist for other district officials. Many principals
reported a desire for common direction and focus communicated to them, so they can
better support staff, students, and families. A clearly defined focused direction would
enable building administrators and others to be in a better position to answer questions and

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 18

address issues without having to refer matters to the two special services administrators.
The department should work to develop clear communication protocols, which are easily
understood and widely distributed. These should be included and updated as part of a
department reference manual. Attention should be given to providing a rationale for
decisions whenever feasible.

2. Direct Communication: It may help to reduce emails and voicemail and improve
communications and relationships by visiting buildings. Unannounced drop-ins are
important, but arranged face-to-face conversations are best. Leaders need to listen to what
is on staff members’ minds. The director, assistant director, and others need to be ready to
share information inside and outside the district.

3. Communications Plan: The department should develop a communication plan for top
issues to address the appropriate stakeholders with ongoing communication throughout the
course of the school year, including regular scheduled communication to keep others
informed of status. The district communications specialist has and uses a very effective
format for such a plan.

4. Transparency: Some staff requested more transparency with the belief that if staff knew
the “why” behind some decisions, there would be greater understanding and trust.
Examples of areas needing more explanation and understanding include response for
requests for 1:1 paraeducators, change of placement for a student, and status of job
postings and hiring for vacancies. All leaders in the district would benefit for providing
similar explanations as decisions are made. This is particularly true of high stakes, value-
laden decisions. Absent, or not understanding the “why,” people are left to create and
process their own versions of the rationale, or lack thereof, behind a decision.

SECTION 4: FINANCES

Commendations:
1. The working relationship between the Office of Special Services administrators and the Office

of Business Services is quite strong and respectful.

2. The transportation services leadership and department personnel work very closely with the
Office of Special Services to maximize services and efficiency.

Recommendations:
1. Capacity: In speaking with administrators, teachers, and support personnel, one theme—

budget and finances for special education—was repeatedly mentioned. The conversations
included a variety of topics, but all revolved around the need for more financial support.
The lack of instructional materials was stated by several sub-groups. Many of the
classroom programs do not have current core materials. For those who do have materials,
there is no consistency across the district regarding the use of the materials. When
adoptions take place, it will be critical to include materials for the special education
teachers, or minimally, the supplemental materials that accompany the adoption, so
teachers are able to support and provide interventions for the core instruction. Having
clear expectations and a list of adopted/recommended materials for each type of program

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 19

would be advisable. Even the Life Skills programs would benefit from a structured
curriculum, like Styer-Fitzgerald, to help guide their daily instructional practice. This will
require some coordination between the general education and special education leaders
who have budget authority. The always-present challenge of coordinating general
education, district, or building budgets with categorical budgets requires communications,
systems thinking, and approaches, and most importantly, a student-centered approach to
management of resources.

2. Classroom Materials and Supplies: Other budgetary items that were shared during
interviews included classroom budgets, resource materials, technology, and basic supplies.
There was consistent lack of understanding of who supplied each of these, how much was
allocated for these items, and how to access the items. It would be helpful to share and
outline the process with both administration and staff. A statement of how much (if any)
each teacher receives for a classroom budget and how to process their orders; a statement
to building administrators regarding Office of Special Services expectations about
providing basic supplies (paper, markers, copier access, etc.); and a timeline for
technology replacement, either by the district or special programs. It would be important
to have an inventory of what special education staff currently have, what condition it is in,
and what the program projects as future needs.

3. Administrative Staffing: The Office of Special Services, in serving the 1,500 plus
students, is struggling to handle the work load created by the students, families, processes,
compliance, and day-to-day operation. All impact the special programs culture and climate
districtwide. Communication is not as timely as people expect and need. Common
direction and focus are not fully developed and shared. Processes are not yet standardized
districtwide. It was frequently shared by both administration and staff that they desire to
have access to more of the director’s time and have more involvement in decisions. A
review of the duties of both the director and assistant director should take place to explore
the division of labor as it relates to daily responsibilities and the consideration of
additional supports for them or their office personnel who could shoulder some of these
responsibilities. It was clearly communicated by everyone interviewed that they believed
the Office of Special Programs was understaffed.

4. Facilities: Facilities issues are always a challenge in special education and such is the case
in South Kitsap. As options become available, special services programs will need to be
considered as the district moves forward with capital projects planning and
implementation. In 2005, the district participated in an accessibility audit. Issues were
identified and many were corrected. However, the district has buildings which due to age
or condition pose significant accessibility issues. For example, wheelchair access is
limited at the high school, and a middle school needs an accessible bathroom/diaper
changing/catheterization space. The district is working very hard to generate community
resources for facilities upgrades. In the meantime, the highest priority issues need to be
addressed for the safety of the students and the protection of the district.

5. Technology: Certificated classroom and related services staff need up-to-date functional
technology to properly carry out their responsibilities. The district and the Information

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 20

Technology Department should work closely together to ensure that staff have the proper
tools to do their jobs.

South Kitsap School District Special Education Management Review, Spring 2017 Page 21