[L]UDLOW — School districts spending exceptionally high or low amounts on special education are included in a report presented to the State Board of Education each year by statute.
That report was presented by Amy Fowler, deputy secretary of the Vermont Agency of Education, at a State Board of Education meeting held recently at the Okemo Mountain Resort.
Districts with higher spending have higher percentages of students who need out-of-district placement, and higher percentages of students identified with high-cost disabilities, Fowler said.
“This should not surprise anyone,” Fowler said. “The more students you have who need an out-of-district placement,” the more those districts are spending, and may end up in the high-spending categories of the report.
To be listed in the high-spending category, a district must be 20 percent above the state average, Fowler said.
The average cost for special education spending per pupil statewide is about $3,500.
Fowler said some disabilities require “very sophisticated services,” which are costly and impact a district’s budget significantly.
High-cost disabilities include intellectual disability, deafness, visual impairment, deaf-blind and multiple disabilities.
Districts with high spending also tend to be small districts, where costs cannot be spread across as many students, and in districts with higher poverty, Fowler said.
Among the districts listed in the high-spending report are: Mt. Tabor, Winhall, Canaan, Guildhall, Isle La Motte, Newport Town, Craftsbury, Hardwick, Bridgewater and Barre City.
“Very few districts are spending exceptionally high or low in special education,” Fowler told the board. “Higher spending is not directly related to staffing ratios.”
Fowler said that about 3 percent of school districts in Vermont are in the high-spending category, while 6 percent “have very low spending, both in their average daily membership percentage and their child count percentage.”
The child count is the mechanism the state uses to account for students receiving special education services, said Fowler.
Among the low-spending districts, which spend less on special education than the state average, are Lincoln, Rupert, East Haven, Newark, Middlebury, Hubbardton, Woodford, Kirby, Bloomfield and Brunswick.
Board Chair Stephan Morse said he did not recall the report being made to the State Board of Education in the past, but Fowler said it is an annual requirement.
Fowler said if a district were spending “an excessively low amount, they might not be providing services,” and the state would want to make sure students are receiving services they are entitled to by law.
Fowler said a small school district may have “almost no students in child count,” receiving services, and that would explain why they are not spending very much.
Conversely, she said, if the spending is excessively high, that could mean “They might be spending tax dollars in ways they shouldn’t, and that would be a concern.”
“It’s really important that we not jump to conclusions regarding why a school system is or isn’t high spending in a particular graph,” Fowler said.
“For example, Rutland City is implementing a robust co-teaching program that increases the number of special education teachers compared to other school systems,” she said. “This model provides support prior to interventions being needed — it is a proactive approach to supporting all students in meeting our rigorous expectations that is very promising.”
“Mt. Tabor appears to have high spending, but they serve few students and are meeting the needs of those students in good faith,” said Fowler. “It would be inaccurate to assume higher spending by individual districts is an indication of a problem within that system.”