Rivers of Red: ten actions to control the impact of special education costs

School Administrator, March, 2003 by Maryann Byrnes

"Rivers of Red in Special Ed."

The newspaper headline leaped out at me as I innocently walked through my local library's periodicals section. It stopped me in my tracks, just as it was designed to do--this article lamenting huge budget overruns in special education.

Most people reading the headline would shake their heads, muttering, "Can't we do something about that system? It's run amok."

My own mutterings were similar, but I read the headline from a different viewpoint--that of someone who served as a special education administrator for 18 years in three New England school districts. In those districts I had faced rising special education costs each year and knew my colleagues shared the experience. A fellow special education administrator often recited his superintendent's comment, "When I see you walk through the door, all I see is money flying out the other way."

For the last five years, I have gained an additional perspective on the thorny topic of special education finance while conducting programmatic and financial evaluations of several school districts. Mounting special education costs frequently drive requests for these studies.

Minimizing Expenses

Special education is expensive. Unfortunately, many of the costs cannot be anticipated. Experience convinces me that some special education expenses are predictable and that others can be avoided. Superintendents who implemented one or more of the ideas below believed they gained some control over special education costs. While these solutions are genuine, the school districts' names have been changed to respect their confidentiality.

* Expect and budget for predictable needs.

For five years, the Springside Public Schools' special education expenditures had already exceeded their budget by February. Administrators deliberated annually which general education services would be cut to fund the shortfall.

While searching for ways to avoid this annual event, the district's administrative council realized the special education budget always was built on the children already receiving services, subtracting costs for those who would be graduating. As in all districts, student needs would emerge in the 18 months between the budget forecast and the last month of the budget year, especially since enrollment was growing. The administrators decided to change their strategy. For every 100 new children enrolling, the budget would project that 12 of these children would need special education services, including two to require extensive (and likely expensive) assistance. This change did not eliminate surprises, but it certainly helped the Springside district budget for likely expenses instead of being unprepared for them.

* Provide literacy supports, especially in Primary grades.

Each January, the Middletown Schools saw a flood of 1st-grade referrals to special education, reflecting worries about children who had not yet begun to read. One year, general education paraprofessionals assisted teachers during literacy blocks, and referrals went way down. Most children were learning to read with just a little more attention. Those who continued to struggle were forwarded for special education referral with much more information and early intervention. Some children need extra time and/or attention to develop, but they don't have a disability. A neighboring district kept its traditional staffing pattern. Guess which one had larger special education costs?

* Use more than one reading approach.

North Shore Public Schools had adopted a whole language, literature-based reading approach. Phonics instruction was available only for children served by special education. The school board did not understand why the special education enrollment figures, as well as the budget, were rising.

No single reading approach reaches everyone. If one did, we all would be using it. Being a one-method school system does control textbook costs. It also guarantees a legitimate demand for options. Ensuring that the only alternative is special education increases costs that continue throughout the grades.

* Consider the consequences of curriculum changes.

Requests for occupational therapy evaluations and services were rising fast in the Happy Valley school system. In fact they had doubled over the past six months. The budget was blown. There was not enough time in the therapist's week to absorb the new referrals. Why was this happening? The overbooked occupational therapist pointed to the new writing program.

To meet state standards, the children in Happy Valley were being asked to write more. That's not bad news in itself, yet the school district had no handwriting program. No one taught the youngest students how to hold the pencils they were using to write those wonderful, inventively spelled words.

Two solutions existed: Hire more therapists or institute a handwriting program. The first option increases special education numbers and costs. The second strengthens curriculum and instruction, teaches children to have legible handwriting and avoids unnecessary special education costs.