Category — Special Education

From today’s Oregon Live:

Portland special ed director still on the job after four challenging months

Betsy Hammond, The Oregonian

Posted:  01/09/2012 2:25 PM

    

PPS new SPED Director (Robert Ford) has been out on leave for about three weeks and now I hear he’s not returning to the Director position.  Ford was only in the position for about five months.    Parents I’ve talked with were happy with Ford.

I know there was criticism about PPS hiring him because many felt he wasn’t qualified for the position.  That may or may not be true.    People have said that he got the position because he’s Black.

Carole Smith, Zeke Smith, Michelle Riddell, Greg Wolleck, Fred Locke and many other administrators aren’t qualified for their positions either.  But nobody has said they got their positions because they’re white.

Any bets (less than $10,000) on who will lead SPED until Ford is replaced?

I haven’t heard anything about it in the media yet but Stacey Sibley, a well-liked and respected former PPS administrator is suing the district for defamation, retaliation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and battery.  (I may have missed a claim)

Why was Stacey treated so badly?  Because she reported safety concerns within the Special Education Department and a friend of the SPED Director (Joanne Mabbott) was the person responsible for creating those safety concerns.  To be clear…there were serious concerns about student and staff safety.

That’s right.  When Stacey reported the concerns, Joanne Mabbott told her if she continued to talk about the problems, she would be written up for insubordination.  Stacey refused to back down and she was gradually stripped of her responsibilities and demoted.

I expect PPS to lose this lawsuit.  The trial begins November 14th.

The district has just posted the results of their internal audit of SPED.  The findings include financial management weaknesses:

My analysis of SPED financial management at PPS shows that the district has not managed program finances effectively.  Over the past several years, weak controls have allowed growth in staffing levels without sufficient management review, federal funding was not always used wisely, and technical errors in the budget development for 2010-2011 required modifications to the adopted budget.  The district also missed opportunities to better manage the growth in special education costs by appropriately controlling the maintenance of effort spending base.  In addition, the district used short-term increases in federal funding to staff on-going services causing a significant funding cliff in 2011-2012 as federal recovery resources end.   Finally, compliance problems due to the disproportionate referrals of African American male students for long-term discipline restricted the use of approximately $3 million in federal funds the past two years and precluded the district from taking advantage of opportunities to lower maintenance of effort spending levels.

Beginning this past year, the district has made significant efforts to improve SPED financial management through the development of improved internal control systems.  Specifically, the district created an independent budget analyst for the special education program, improved budget monitoring processes and financial information, and established a new method for reviewing and approving new staff positions.  These steps should help the district better plan and manage the ongoing operational costs of the special education program.

You can read the entire report  here.

Do you remember Leon Dudley who was the principal at Jefferson for a minute?  He wasn’t the most qualified candidate and he had a troubled history but PPS hired him anyway.  It sounds like the new SPED Director (Robert Ford) may be another Dudley.

The PPS press release says “An administrator with strong school-based experience in special and general education and a commitment to working with struggling students is Portland Public Schools new director of Special Education.”

Ford’s resume includes being assistant principal of David Douglas High School from 2004 to 2006. He served as associate principal at Frontier Middle School in the Evergreen (Wash.) School District since then.

That’s not much history to warrant hiring him to lead SPED but let’s look at the PPS Director of SPED job description.

1. Master’s Degree in Special Education; doctorate preferred.

2. Hold or be eligible for a valid Oregon administrative license.

3. Three to five years of successful administrative experience in special education and/or general education.  Experience as a principal is preferred.

4. Demonstrated experience with legislative bodies which deal with special education legislation, and experience in urban schools is very desirable.

5. Demonstrated ability to communicate effectively (both written and oral) with all stakeholders.

6. Must possess knowledge of federal and state statutes, regulations and interpretation in the area of Special Education.

Pretty weak job description especially considering that the SPED department has been a mess for years.  How does being one of two assistant principals at a middle school enrolling 674 students qualify Ford to lead the SPED department?  Was he the most qualified candidate?

It’s been a busy week for PPS.  They continue to waste taxpayer dollars with their staffing decisions.  Joanne Mabbott (Director of Special Education) will become an interim principal at Maplewood Elementary.  She says that the decision was hers.  What were her options?

Historically, administrators placed in lower level positions have retained their higher level salaries (Steve Olczak, Cynthia Harris, Willie Poinsette…).  I would love to know how those individual decisions impact the administrator salary schedules.  Do other principals get increases to bring their salaries up to those of demoted administrators?  Or are there just inequities within that employee group?

 Superintendent Smith’s recent recommendation to cut paraeducator and bilingual educational assistant staff is certainly consistent with PPS history.  Like a playground bully, Smith picks on the weakest members.

Her recommendation to close Marshall is just one more example of that.  She doesn’t have the courage to stand up to Grant or Lincoln or Wilson so she took the easy route.  She doesn’t expect resistance from the Marshall community. 

Her high school redesign plan closes Marshall without giving parents or students the opportunity to be on the focus school redesign team.  I’m sure that’s because the “redesign” will be the old design, certain to fail. 

The small focus school at Marshall isn’t going to open.  There isn’t any student or parent interest in it.  Remember the Young Men’s Academy?  The high school redesign plan says a representative from Marshall (staff member) wanted a small school at the campus.  One person wants it so the community suffers?

The parents and students in the Marshall area have been saying for years that they’ve been cheated by the small schools concept.  They weren’t happy with the small schools because they didn’t offer anything. 

The high school redesign is our chance to FINALLY get a decent shot at a public education. 

The superintendent couldn’t justify her recommendation to close Marshall based on the SEER data so she added bullshit criteria and lies.  One of the essential factors that informed decision-making was “local understanding of the city’s topography, neighborhood’s sense of community, and travel routes.”  How does she measure the neighborhood’s sense of community?  Do they complain about paying premiums for their homes?

Another essential factorinforming Smith’s decision-making is the opportunity for unique partnerships.  David Douglas isn’t going to lease Marshall.  The letter from David Douglas superintendent Rommell (Smith’s friend) says she’s encouraged by the possibility of providing opportunities for David Douglas and Marshall students.  How encouraged?  Has David Douglas made a commitment to lease Marshall?  Or does Smith expect the PPS board and community to assume David Douglas will be leasing Marshall when closing the school?  Has Smith seen David Douglas’ proposed budget?   

New homes are cropping up everywhere in the Marshall cluster and enrollment at Marshall has increased since 2004.  One issue Smith said she plans to address in the high school redesign is “very large enrollment at Harrison Park”.  That would be our multiple award winning Clark Elementary which was merged with Binnsmead Middle School illegally.  Harrison Park’s enrollment is very large because of the district’s decision to close Clark while the area was seeing significant growth. 

Here’s a profile of Marshall High School now:

How does closing a school that serves a higher than average percentage of students who are poor, minorities, and/or have disabilities promote equity?  It doesn’t but it does make them an easy target.

One More Thing…

I just got to thinking, that I went on in great length regarding the joke of an education my nephew received in Portland Public Schools special education, without telling you what he’s doing now. After the hearing we pulled him out of Marshall due to the same old same old. We gave ‘em one more chance at Lincoln High while we were waiting for them to pay up on the remedy, but within a week we knew that too was a bust.

After he was finished at Sylvan Learning Center Joseph got a job where the idea was for him to develop work appropriate behavior in order to become competitively employed. He’s been there for the last 4+ years as one of their best employees. The problem is that he’s still not doing what he loves most… working with numbers. Last Spring we decided to do something about that.

We put together what is called a “Person Centered Plan”, where the people involved in a person’s life gather with a facilitator to discuss someone’s hopes, dreams, and strengths. When we were finished, we had a solid plan on steps to assist Joseph with getting into the numbers racquet (couldn’t resist). He now is moving in the right direction.

First we got him a calculator/adding machine. He’s learned to make a monthly budget and has done really well with this. We purchased a laptop with a printer and software having to do with accounting type stuff. He’s enrolled at Clackamas Community College, where he’s taking some basic computer classes this fall. By all accounts he’s doing great. This winter he’ll be taking a class on Excel and may get an internship doing some data entry or basic accounting. He tells (yes, he can say most of what he’s thinking these days) anyone who asks him that he wants to eventually work in a bank. For Joseph; he’ll go as far as he wants to go.

Joseph was never unteachable. He was never physically aggressive. He was never any more difficult to educate than any other kid. He was failed by the education system in Portland.

REALLY THE END

Due Process…Day 2

As the 2nd day of testimony in Joseph’s Due Process Hearing began, we really had no idea what was to come. The vice principal from Grant was first on our list. He is the one that I told we were going to sue the district, and here he was, being sworn in. There were quite a few observers in attendance, as word got out quickly among the special education community that we had kicked some district butt the day before. I think that many of these folks were frustrated with what was going on in their own disabled children/students educations, and were getting some vicarious pleasure from the proceedings. Day 2 certainly didn’t disappoint.

He started out by saying he was administrative vice-principal at Grant, and was in charge of supervising special education there. He went on to say in that capacity he didn’t know if an Expulsion Hearing ever took place. Next he told me he announced BEFORE the Manifestation Determination Hearing that Joseph wouldn’t be allowed back in that school, which is a direct violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), thus a violation of Joseph’s civil rights. Actually, he wasn’t invited to that hearing in the first place. Next he said the first time he met Joseph was at that hearing, so there couldn’t have been the required disciplinary conference when he suspended Joseph. Another civil rights violation. Next we found out that what we’d gotten from Joseph’s file was his transfer slip and withdrawal form put together to look like 1 form. The ALJ wasn’t pleased with this new piece of information, and made him have Grant fax over the 2 separate documents. Turns out, what was covered up on the withdrawal form was the line where the parent or guardian (us) signature goes. Then he goes on to tell me that the lawyers recently explained to him a rudimentary term related to special ed. Well informed “supervisor of special ed.”, huh? He admitted to determining the suspension and possible expulsion based on 2nd and 3rd hand information. Then he suddenly remembered there was no expulsion hearing. Then he told me he’d said Joseph couldn’t return to Grant DURING the manifestation determination. The lawyer then interrupted, saying; “I think that’s been asked and answered, Your Honor; several times”. I’d like to ad; in several ways. Next, I went about proving that he was unqualified to “supervise special ed.”, but the ALJ stopped me. His testimony ended with the ALJ asking him if he spoke with Joseph when he suspended him. His answer was; “ No. My understanding is that Joe doesn’t talk.” The ALJ didn’t like his answer and replied; “ Well, “speak” is a broad term, communicate with.” She then sort of rolled her eyes and excused him.

Next up was the big, burly dude that Joseph had battered. I did the questioning. He talked about how Joseph used to “get all up in people’s faces”, and how that bothered his peers. No one ever mentioned that to us. They were supposed to, they just didn’t. He talked about a witness to Joseph’s behavior; or more accurately, the sound of his behavior, but he couldn’t remember her name. This was someone he worked with. Strange…

Suzanne interviewed Joseph’s Multnomah County case manager next. He refuted their claim that I yelled at the vice principal at the Manifestation Determination. He also said that the “supervisor of special ed.” at Grant did in fact kick Joseph out of school prior to that hearing. Suzanne then began asking questions about district staff keeping agreements made in meetings. He was answering that they hadn’t, but the ALJ ended this line of questioning, saying that wasn’t in our issues. I think by this point she was doing a bit of protecting the district.

I questioned his current Life Skills teacher at Marshall next. She’d been an ally when Joseph started there, but once we filed for due process that quickly changed. She was able to help out with some of the dates around him beginning there. It became more obvious that someone had indeed falsified that information. Once she realized she was being helpful her memory went on her. She didn’t know if school was in session on Veteran’s day or if that is a day their closed. As she began contradicting the other folk’s testimony by accident she became increasingly nervous. I pointed out how the communication book had been altered after the fact while Joseph was in her class. She had no idea how that could have possibly happened.

We only had one more witness to call, and he hadn’t made it there yet. The ALJ decided this would be a good time for Suzanne to question me. We used this time to make perfectly clear how the district had dropped the ball. We pointed to the lies that were told, the documents altered, and the misdeeds that they attempted to cover up. The ALJ jumped in asking questions. She’d already made up her mind that the district had failed to provide FAPE, and was getting clarification of facts. When she was done with that she asked what we sought for remedy. At that point I knew we’d won! I laid it out there for her. We wanted compensation for all the wasted time in PPS. We wanted them to pay for real academic training outside the district. And we wanted the falsified documentation in his file to be fixed. It was one of the greatest feelings I’ve ever had.

Our friend and advocate finally made it and Suzanne asked him several questions to further demonstrate their sliminess. He also refuted the “angry” label they attempted to lay on me. He was at the meeting of November 6th, and shed a lot of light on what REALLY was said. The ALJ also asked him some questions regarding his understanding of rules and terminology that had been discussed throughout the hearing.

At that point we broke for lunch. Suzanne and I were giddy when we walked out of the building. All the time and energy we put into this process was about to pay off.

After lunch the district’s lawyer was allowed to make a closing statement. She essentially said that we were not lawyers, and did not fully understand the law. True. But we had a damned good understanding of right and wrong.

Suzanne read a closing statement she’d written. It was truly beautiful. I’m typing it here:

“In closing, I would like to make a statement on behalf of Joe. Because I remember when we had a hearing after the suspension that Joe didn’t get a chance to speak. But then we all know that Joe never says much. He pretty much faces his challenges in silence. Though some may have their doubts, we know that someday Joe will find his own voice. In the meantime, we’re having another hearing. And he is counting on us to speak for him. I think he’s figuring that we know what’s best for him, and he’s sure we’ll work it out.
It must be interesting to be Joe. He doesn’t see the world the same way we do, and it’s confusing for him. In Joe’s world, the sounds are too bright, and the lights are too loud. Language and social conventions are a complete mystery. And people are walking around acting like they understand it, only to change the rules midstream and in every minute. It must be stressful. I guess I’d learn to focus on the numbers, the clock, and the calendar too. They’re consistent. If you list things inside the boxes, they take a much clearer form. Two plus two is always four. The formula works up to multi-digits. If you check the clock frequently, you can’t miss the natural rhythm and order of it. Time ticks away at a steady pace; yet both the clock and the calendar hold the potential for highlighting the fact that at any moment something could happen that you hadn’t planned for.
This isn’t to say that anyone should feel sorry for Joe. That would be a mistake. And I think it’s a mistake that folks make all too often. He has his strengths too. For one, he really loves to learn. And, he’s a quick learner. He really likes people. If we’re honest, we’ll admit that isn’t always true for most of us. I think he studies our faces closely, because he really finds us fascinating. That’s been a gift to me.
Joe’s always been kind to me. Certainly, I’ve never been afraid of him. That is except for before he came to live with us. Before I knew him I was sometimes afraid. Mostly because I wasn’t sure I really knew how to be good for him, and because I was ignorant of things like autism. Joe has taught me a lot about autism. And David has taught me. And all the people I’ve met since he came into my life have taught me.

So I face most days unafraid, especially of Joe. I have to wonder if anyone else thinks the school made a mistake when they placed a judgment on Joe’s potential, before they got to know him. I wonder if anyone else thinks he deserved a second look; whether shuffling him around from school to school was just lazy or mean?
We were surprised to hear that they were afraid to teach him. I wonder if anyone else thinks that zero tolerance discipline policies just might be wrong? Or that when we find we’re approaching the jobs we have to do from a place of fear, if it doesn’t lead us to seek out more information, we soon may be guilty of prejudice. I don’t know. And I don’t know if you, or Joe, or anyone else knows. But maybe if we check the time again, someone will change the rules.”

The ALJ had been gently crying halfway throughout, as had most of the people in the room.

To Be Continued…

Due Process… Day 1

We filed for Due Process against Portland Public Schools on 12/11/2000. Joseph had attended 3 different High Schools here in less than 1 year, and had yet to receive any real education. We decided to represent him ourselves as we were clear on how he’d been denied a free appropriate public education (FAPE), and believed we could prove it in court.

We knew going into it that in Oregon it is rare that school districts lose in these hearings. We also were aware that parents representing their children without an attorney almost never came out on top. In order for us to win this thing on Joseph’s behalf, we would need to learn Special education law. That’s what we set about doing. Actually; Suzanne set about doing that. My time was spent sifting through all the evidence we had that demonstrated dishonesty, sneakiness, and incompetence. Believe me, there was a lot. In fact; the closer we looked at what had gone on, we saw more than we realized was there when we initially filed.

Our best evidence was the communication logs that had been going back and forth between home and school(s) for the last year. We discovered new evidence that we didn’t even realize was there until we began to study these logs. Fortunately; PPS was playing a delay game in going to hearing. This gave us more time to prepare, so we didn’t argue about it. We called 13 witnesses to the stand in the 2 days of the hearing. 9 of these witnesses were employees of the school district. Of these, we believed 7 were directly involved in denying Joseph FAPE. You might say they were hostile witnesses. The district was represented by their own special ed. Attorney (the one who had stepped into the picture when Joe was kicked out of Grant) and an attorney from Miller Nash here in Portland. The hearing took place on May 1st and 2nd 2001. It was held at the Child Service Center, which was by no means any sort of neutral site.

From the moment we walked into the room things were interesting. The lawyer from Miller Nash was extremely snippy; refusing to shake my hand. In response I began singing Aretha Franklin’s “Respect” as we set things out on our table. The district’s lawyer snidely asked Suzanne if she “slept well last night?” They were obviously trying to lift a leg up on us, but it wasn’t working. Suzanne smiled at her and said; “I slept quite well, and you?” The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) entered the room and we began.

The district got things going with their lawyer reading a statement from the Director of Special Ed. She said that she believes everyone loses in a due process hearing. She spoke of how hearings drag educators away from their students, are costly, and that Joseph was merely 1 of 6,300 Special Ed. Students in the district. Her guilt tripping wasn’t working so well, as we believed we were representing those other 6,300 kids in exposing those who supposedly cared about their education.

Next, I made an opening statement. I said that although Joseph had learned very little in PPS, Suzanne and I had learned much from them. We had learned that while they weren’t willing to teach him spelling, cursive writing, or keyboards, they were what seemed like eager to alter or conceal documents pertaining to his education. I then briefly laid out how PPS had denied Joseph FAPE. I pointed out that the location of the hearing was totally non neutral, and that the Director could avoid due process by actually providing an education to students. I closed with talking about how the ALJ had apparently summarized our issues based on the district’s pre hearing brief.

Before we began questioning witnesses I spoke about missing pages in the copy of communication logs in Joseph’s school file which we had obtained prior to the hearing. There were other pages that had been altered and I wanted to make sure we were all on the same page literally. They had also added pages from his communication log that were dated after we had filed. It was basically a mess that took 20 minutes or so to sort through before we could start questioning folks.

Then the ALJ swore in the first witness. It’s important to note that she began each swearing with; “Under penalty of perjury…” Though some of these people blatantly perjured in their testimony, none suffered any sort of penalty for doing so. Suzanne was questioning the Life Skills teacher from Jeff; school #1. She told Suzanne that she had determined Joseph wouldn’t participate in regular ed. Classes after observing him for 2 or 3 weeks in her class. She also used an old IEP (they hadn’t seen his most recent one yet) from California to help her with this determination. She went on to grill the teacher regarding what other students in her class were doing academically. Not much. In her testimony she shared that the ridiculous educational goals she came up with were based on the 2 weeks she worked with him (along with the other 15 or 20 kids in her class). She also admitted that she believed he was “mentally retarded” which he is not. She was busted by both Suzanne and the ALJ on several contradictions in her testimony and left the stand with a bright red face.

Next, it was my turn. I questioned the vocational staff person from Jeff regarding what led up to the incident with the beefy big dude Joseph supposedly assaulted. He had been the one who initially set Joseph up with this gig. Although Joseph was not doing well with staying out of his coworker’s personal space, this fellow never reported to us that this was going on. He was supposed to, he just didn’t. He also was involved in some altered math related goal documents. A terrible memory this man has. He was unable to recall much of anything that occurred, and continually asked ME questions to refresh his memory.

Suzanne questioned the next witness; Joseph’s Speech Pathologist while attending Jefferson. Her ability to recall was even worse than the witness before her. Suzanne kept her questioning brief as the “I don’t recall” mantra indicated she wasn’t going to share much of anything.

Joseph’s 4 day teacher from Grant was next on our list, and I questioned her primarily about the day of the incident where Joseph was kicked out of Grant. She shared that although no one from Grant knew or trusted Joseph regarding safety issues at that point, they let him go from the worksite by school bus back to the school unaccompanied following his alleged attack of his supervisor. She also testified that she didn’t remember any disciplinary conference with Joseph which is mandatory for a suspension to occur. Her memory regarding time lines was inconsistent, but over all she was helpful.

The Director of Special Education at Portland Public Schools was next up. I questioned her. Firstly; she referred to notes she would take as being what she used as her memory. Also, right up front she wanted to make sure we knew it was the Teacher’s Union that allowed for Joseph being excluded from Grant. I asked her why all the heavy hitters (including herself) were at the meeting following Joseph being kicked out of Grant. It’s not like we asked her, or the 2nd in charge, or Grant’s principle, or 2 area supervisors to attend this meeting. Her reply was that I seemed so angry that they decided they should act fast. Of course they were 1 day beyond the legal limit for keeping Joseph out of school, but I guess her notes didn’t reflect that. I then asked a lot of questions regarding dates of actions taken following that meeting being out of order, not making sense, and being bogus. She claimed ignorance of any such activities. I asked her about her referral to Eastside Education Center. Again, she was unaware that they’d be totally inappropriate for educating Joseph. Halfway through my questioning she came out with; “You know what? I think you’re badgering me now, and you’ve crossed a line.” I could hear the stifled laughter of the special ed. parents who were there as observers in the back of the room. Me thinks she doth protest too much.

The last witness on day 1 was the area supervisor of special ed. in the Jefferson cluster of schools. Suzanne took her on. This administrator and Joseph’s teacher at Jeff had been in direct conflict as to why he had such worthless goals for a year. They each blamed the other for this screw up. This administrator allowed Joseph’s civil rights to be violated at Grant. This administrator was responsible for back dated important documents. Suzanne didn’t go easy on her. She jumped on the director’s band wagon in attempting to portray me as this frighteningly angry man, but nobody was buying it. Of course like her colleagues she couldn’t remember anything until emails, letters and faxes were brought into evidence. Then her memory would come back clear as a bell.

With all the testimony from these professionals we knew we were coming out on top. The lawyers jumped at every opportunity to admonish, correct, and silence us, but it wasn’t working. The ALJ knew we weren’t lawyers, and afforded us the opportunity to ask questions in occasional backward fashion. Overall day 1 went quite well.

TO BE CONTINUED…