BINGHAMTON CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

AN EDUCATION SERVICES ANALYSIS

CONDUCTED BY:

JOHN MCGUIRE, M.ED. MICHAEL NEIMAN, PH.D. CCC/S-LP SHANNA DELPRETE, M.A. CCC/S-LP RICHARD LABRIE, M.A.

Respectfully Submitted:

June 2015

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of 1 | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION

Executive Process Summary ...... 3 Glossary of Abbreviations ...... 3 Glossary of Terms...... 4 Acknowledgements ...... 4 Document Organization ...... 4

ORGANIZATION CONSIDERATIONS Overview ...... 5 Findings ...... 5 Recommendations...... 8

CONTINUUM OF SUPPORTS Overview ...... 10 Findings ...... 11 Recommendations...... 15

FINANCIAL REVIEW

MEDICAID

Overview ...... 18 Findings ...... 19 Recommendations...... 25

TRANSPORTATION

Overview ...... 27 Findings ...... 28 Recommendations...... 30

SUMMARY AND FINAL COMMENTARY………………………………….…………………………………….31

SOURCES AND RESOURCES……………….………………………………….…………………………………….32

APPENDICES…………………………………….………………………………….……………………….……….…….35

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 2 | P a g e

INTRODUCTION

EXECUTIVE PROCESS SUMMARY

The leadership of the Binghamton City School District (hereafter, referred to as the District) commissioned this review of specific areas that support struggling learners. In conducting this analysis, the review team employed proprietary methodology from a pre-established paradigm (i.e., an Educational Services Analysis), which triangulates information gleaned from qualitative and quantitative information. More specifically, the qualitative analyses comprised: (1) a series of interviews with special and general education teachers, related service providers, paraprofessionals, central office administrators, and school-based administrators; (2) a review of documents (i.e., IEPs) to ascertain the degree and appropriateness of educational programming and services; and (3) site visits to District programs to ascertain the continuum of services and programs. Quantitative analyses included: (1) multidimensional analyses of information contained within the IEPs; (2) comparative analyses of staffing and corresponding workloads; and (3) financial data pertaining to programmatic expenditures (e.g., personnel and transportation) and revenues (i.e., the Medicaid program). Given the number of data points, the results that are reported within this document represent recurring themes from the interviews (outlying comments were not included as part of the primary findings) coupled with quantitative data.

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIS: Academic Instructional Supports ARI: Availability Ratio Index ASY: Academic School Year BOCES: Boards of Cooperative Educational Services CSE: Committee on Special Education CPSE: Committee on Preschool Special Education FAPE: Free and Appropriate Public Education FTE: Full-time equivalent IEP: Individualized Education Program LRE: Least Restrictive Environment OT: Occupational Therapist or occupational therapy services PD: Professional development PT: Physical Therapist or physical therapy services RSP: Related Service Provider RtI: Response to Intervention S-LP: Speech-Language Pathologist or speech-language pathology services SDG: Similar District Group SWDs: Students with Disabilities

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 3 | P a g e

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Continuum Of Supports: The range of programs, personnel, and resources to support all students.

Effectiveness: The degree to which the services under review promote optimal educational outcomes and student access to the curriculum.

Efficiency: The degree to which the special education services and personnel under review are responsibly, uniformly, and optimally utilized to ensure District resources are being expended in a fiscally sound manner.

Horizontal Alignment: Practices that correlate special education instruction to grade-level expectations.

Vertical Alignment: The degree to which the transition of SWDs as they progress from one grade, school, or program to another, is seamless.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors wish to acknowledge District staff and school personnel. This project necessitated a great amount of effort in facilitating logistics and in securing documents; the team is grateful for the efforts of all central office and school-based staff. Throughout the entire process, the cooperative relationship between Futures and the District has enabled the team to work with District leadership in a collegial and transparent manner in order to maximize the benefits of this analysis for the District. Futures team members are sensitive to, and focused upon, the ultimate objective of the project: To support the District leadership and stakeholders in attaining their goals and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the delivery of educational services.

DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION

The staff of Futures is pleased to provide this report of the comprehensive analysis of the programs and services conducted in November of 2014. The primary purpose of this analysis is to describe, and to provide suggestions to improve, specific areas within its education delivery system that include:

(1) In-District Continuum of Services

(2) Out of District Placements

(3) Response to Intervention

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 4 | P a g e

(4) Organization and Structure of Special Education Services (5) Related Services

(6) District Finances Related to Recoupment of Medicaid and Special Education Transportation

These six components are considered with respect to: Organizational Considerations, Continuum of Supports, and Financial Review. In turn, each component is considered with respect an Overview, Findings, and Recommendations. The report concludes with a global consideration of the delivery system and those key recommendations District leadership may consider as part of its short- and long-term strategic planning.

ORGANIZATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

OVERVIEW

The authors intentionally begin this document with a consideration of the organizational and cultural capacities of, and within, the special education delivery system. The reason for this is that without the requisite positive leadership and mindsets, all of the forthcoming recommendations concerning the programmatic and fiscal enhancements will have less potential for successful implementation.

FINDINGS

CLIMATE AND CULTURE

. At the school buildings, the relationship between special and general education staff was perceived as variable, but, improved and improving over recent years, with good relationships among teachers who collaborated in inclusive situations and at the director level across disciplines, and positive relationships with building principals, despite the potentially overwhelming nature and multiple conflicting demands of the building administrators’ roles.

. The ownership of SWDs on the part of adults was also described as variable and both individual and school building-dependent. In general, ownership was reported to be higher at the elementary schools than at the middle schools or high school, and it was also seen as better among those general education teachers who had been in collaborative relationships with their special education teacher colleagues. There were concerns among respondents regarding what were perceived to be significant vestiges of “Your Student- My Student” thinking among staff, especially at the secondary schools. The introduction of the APPR has staff quite anxious and, and as with other districts the authors have analyzed, has the potential to undo the culture of “our student.”

. As per the educational environments presented in Figure 1 below, the data of the District as it relates to keepings SWDs in the LRE is mixed. There is clearly work to be done in keeping students in the general

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 5 | P a g e

education environment,1 yet the under-utilization of separate settings (i.e., the fourth category) is commendable, and corroborates the District’s initiative to return students from out of district placements.

Figure 1: Trends of Educational Environments

Percentage of Percentage of Percentage of Special Education Special Education Special Education State Average Population Population Population 2008 2013 2013-SDG Location Inside Regular Class 80% or More of Day 58% 53.8% 48.8% 57.8%

Inside Regular Class 79-40% of Day 7% 7.4% 17.5% 11.7%

Inside Regular Class Less Than 40% of Day 31% 33% 24.7% 21.4

Separate and Other Settings 4.2% 4.3% 9% 9.1%

ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY

. There was virtual unanimity of the deft handling of the CSE process by sub-CSE chairs (the psychologists). Consequently, there was reported to be a high degree of understanding on the part of staff and parents with respect to the concepts of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Moreover, it was stated that many parents may over-defer to the CSE teams, given their frequent disengagement from their children’s education. It is commendable that per the latest available data, the District achieved above criterion for the category Percent of parents who reported that schools facilitated parent involvement to improve services and results for students with disabilities (90.3% vs. a State target of 89%).

. It is notable that given the varied organizational structures of special education departments, it is difficult to make a direct comparison of district-level administrative staff. However, the 2 FTE central office administrative staff (comprising a Special Education Director and Assistant Director) equates to a ratio of approximately 394 SWDs to 1 administrative staff is therefore considered to be on the high side (i.e., more leanly staffed) than expected levels; it is the authors’ experience that this ratio is typically between 200 to 300 SWDs to every one administrative staff member.

HUMAN CAPITAL AND STAFFING

. Despite the current staffing model, staff were very complimentary of the Special Education Director’s and Assistant Director’s levels of responsiveness to their needs. As an example to the degree of support staff feel they receive, most respondents expressed that the quality of the professional development opportunities that

1 It is also notable that the numbers of students in the general education environment for at least 80% of their day has decreased from 58% in the academic year ending 2008. Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 6 | P a g e

had been provided was very good to excellent; this was all the more appreciated given the staff’s understanding of the fiscal constraints faced by the District.

. As it pertains to building staff capacity there was an expressed desire to have greater “like to like” meetings for staff addressing students with similar needs (e.g., teachers of 8:1:1 and 12:1:1 classrooms) as a mechanism to: (1) improve vertical articulation of these programs; and (2) increase staff’s ability to share best practices with colleagues.

. The personnel under review available to support SWDs was gauged by benchmarking the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) staff members to this overall in-District special education population of 788 students (as per the most recent data). In essence, this statistic is an “availability ratio index (ARI)” and allows an equivalent comparison of other districts with respect to staffing from a “macro” perspective. Although numbers of staff typically vary widely from State to State and district to district, a recent report from the Urban Special Education Leadership Collaborative Education Development Center, Inc. reveals an important benchmark: speech-language pathologists (115:1); psychologists (248:1); occupational therapists (469:1), and physical therapists (1015:1). The authors’ data base suggests a more liberal staffing model for speech-language pathologists, occupational therapists, and physical therapists with the caveat that these specialists also vary significantly from district to district.

Figure 2: Availability Ratio Indices

Discipline Actual Actual ARI Expected ARI FTE

Special Education Teachers 84 9.4.1 10:1

Paraprofessionals* 154 5.2:1 7-10:1

Speech-Language Pathology 10.6 74:1 60:1

Occupational Therapy 3.2 197:1 180:1

Physical Therapy 2 389:1 350:1

School Psychology** 8 833:1 700-1,000 (all students)

* Only those funded through special education

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 7 | P a g e

Commentary

Special Education Teachers: As indicated in Figure 2, the number of special education teachers is slightly more staffed than expected limits.

Paraprofessionals: The numbers of para-educator staff is more generously staffed than expected levels. However, with the expected with the institution of more stringent exit and entry criteria, there will be an opportunity to more thoughtful assignments and re-allocation (e.g., job coaching at the secondary level) of the paraprofessionals, and perhaps create more capacity for a concerted “bring back” of students currently in out of district placements.

Speech-language Pathology: Although the numbers of S-LPs are lower than expected, they are providing an average of over 60 minutes of treatment per week (as indicated in Appendix A). As described in the Recommendations section, re-calibration of exit and entry guidelines for service minutes may support efficiencies.

Occupational and Physical Therapies: As indicated in Figure 2, the numbers of OTs and PTs are slightly less than expected levels. However, a review of IEPs indicated that prescribed levels of OT and PT exceeded levels determined to be in accordance with student needs and ages. For example, students receiving intervention to address handwriting and/or cutting were removed from the classroom for 50 to 75 minutes per week. In some of these cases, teacher consultation within the classroom, in conjunction with fewer direct minutes within the general education classroom setting may be a model better aligned with best practices within an educational setting.

School Psychology/Behavioral Health: As indicated Figure 2, the number of school psychologists are within expected levels. If one factors in the six school social workers (as detailed in Appendix A), there are 14 behavioral health professionals available to the in-district special education population, or an ARI of 56:1. Based on the authors’ limited data set of four other districts in the District’s similar District Group (SDG), this represents the most leanly staffed model.

RECOMMENDATIONS

CLIMATE AND CULTURE

. As part of an expanded initiative to increase parent participation in the CSE process, the District should consider inviting parents to a series of open, candid conversations regarding topics pertaining to special education law at both the school and District level. Furthermore, to support representative parent engagement across the District, it may be beneficial to have the school-based PTA presidents work in conjunction with principals to identify a parent stakeholder in special education.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 8 | P a g e

. The authors applaud Dr. Martinez’ community outreach endeavors. It may be helpful if a team of administrators, including the PPS director, were to join Dr. Martinez quarterly to allow staff, parents, and other community stakeholders to engage in discussions pertaining specifically to special education.

. As new teachers are hired in the District, as part of their orientation, provide them with an operational hiring guide, thus ensuring all teachers understand the ownership standard of their jobs and allowing unanimity of the culture of ownership across all schools on a “go forward” basis.

ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY

. Understanding the importance of the CSE, the acumen with which the school psychologists currently conduct the duties associated with the sub-CSE chair process, and the ramifications of changing their roles the authors posit that there a myriad of advantages to a re-organization of this structure. Currently, the psychologists who are presumably the most equipped to lead, and provide support to, RtI teams across all tiers and domains (i.e., literacy, numeracy, and behavior) cannot do so because of their involvement in the CSE process, which may include clerical duties as well.

There is no “perfect” model, but one option may be to simply have the school social workers become trained in the CSE process and trade this work load responsibility with the school psychologists. It is notable that the current sub-CSE chairs had excellent training with BOCES, and this coupled with a “turn-key” transition with the school psychologists may be the least disruptive option. In addition, this connectivity to the CSE process will allow the Social Workers better access to Wraparound services by coordinating supports for students requiring emotional-behavioral supports within the school and the community.

HUMAN CAPITAL AND STAFFING

. Provide more opportunities, perhaps on a quarterly basis, to allow teachers of similar populations to meet as “like to like” groups via a Professional Learning Community model. This will enhance the vertical alignment of programs and allow a forum to optimize the sharing of best practices. This will optimize the success of the programs for students.

. In order to provide the requisite balance between site-based management of special education services and District support, provide principals with a “Special Education 101” refresher session at the beginning of each year and institute a special education strain of professional learning during regularly scheduled leadership meetings. This capacity building model will allow principals to take on a more active leadership role with special education and provide them with ongoing job embedded professional learning and support. Such topics should include strategies to:

o Ensure all SWDs have opportunities to experience maximal Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) interactions with typical peers;

o Build instructional staff’s knowledge regarding inclusionary education;

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 9 | P a g e

o Enhance achievement of students with disabilities;

o Align the continuum of services within their respective schools;

o Provide additional supports to new teachers;

o Ensure that building leadership understands their role in attending CSE meetings as the District representative; and

o Create heightened consciousness of the fiscal costs of assigned services and programs at each school level.

. The District is strongly encouraged to revisit the creation of systematic, district-wide entry and exit criteria for S-LP services. It is recommended that the S-LP convene to create this document to ensure that all of the stakeholders agree on the requisite criteria, thereby ensuring their equitable application. At the outset, this document should focus on the binary issue of whether or not a student should qualify for (any or all) related services based on functional educational performance and performance on standardized tests; future protocols may be amended to specify the intensity of service delivery based on the variables of age, effect(s) of the disability on academic performance, and the nature of the educational curricula. Using guidelines from a proposed severity matrix, that the authors will provide to District leadership, it is expected that mandated service times can be appropriately adjusted to allow the S-LPs more time to support students.

. With respect to handwriting, if it is the sole area of required services, it is suggested OTs’ role remain entirely consultative and that handwriting not “rise to the level” of being addressed as part of an IEP. By backing out handwriting from the formal IEP-based workload, this will allow the OTs more time to address higher needs students (e.g., homebound students, students on the autism spectrum, and students with life skills needs) and to devote more service minutes to these populations.

CONTINUUM OF SUPPORTS

OVERVIEW

Although the term “continuum of services” is associated with special education, it is useful to broaden this definition to “continuum of supports” because it can be used to conceptualize a system of instructional and programmatic provisions for all students (i.e., students with and without disabilities). Ideally, this continuum provides programming, personnel, and resources to appropriately address the educational needs of students in the general education classrooms; or, if needed, in special education programs designed to be closely integrated with the general education environment.

The other framework that is inherent in a programmatic discussion encompasses the student-centric constructs of horizontal alignment and vertical alignment. Horizontal Alignment refers to practices that correlate special education instruction and supports to grade-level expectations; it can be measured Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 10 | P a g e

academically by student achievement and more broadly by the quantity and quality of opportunities that SWDs have with their typical peers. Vertical Alignment is the degree to which the transition of SWDs as they progress from one grade, school, or program, is seamless; vertical alignment requires consistent, uniform, and robust programming that ensures the needs of SWDs are consistently met until they graduate or are deemed ineligible to receive special education services. Figure 3 illustrates these two dimensions of alignment.

Figure 3: The two-dimensions of alignment

Vertical Alignment: consistent, uniform, and robust programming across programs and schools

Student

Horizontal Alignment: meaningful inclusion opportunities & achievement within grade-level Source: Futures Education, 2015

FINDINGS

RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

It may be helpful to conceptualize the efficacy of Response to Intervention (RtI) using two practical examples. Using the traditional RtI as illustrated in Figure 4 below, consider two students who may require supports in two separate domains: academic (student A) and behavior (student B). In either case, the base of the pyramid is meant to serve these students, as with all students, with interventions that are: (1) explicitly linked to curriculum; (2) proactive; and (3) delivered in the general education setting. With the assumption that the students are not responding to the Tier 1 instruction, each subsequent tier becomes more targeted, intense, and individualized in the domain with which student requires support. Figure 4. The RtI Framework

Student A Student B Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 11 | P a g e

. There are a myriad of supports for students at the school level including AIS and Title-1 services, yet the manner in which these interface (i.e., the way they “talk to each other”) appears disjointed within and across schools. As it pertains to RtI in particular, staff expressed optimism that this is an emerging program with greater resources devoted to literacy (as compared to numeracy and behavior) at this time. For example, as it pertains to the domain of behavior, there is a general adaptation of Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS), yet the methodologies and nomenclature employed by each school reportedly varies. The need for uniform programs is true of any district, yet the need in the District is even more pronounced given the high levels of mobility.

. Although there are a number of reasons why a special education population may fluctuate (e.g., a plethora of SWDs moving into a district) one of the over-riding “meta” indicators of the overall success of a District- wide RtI is to compare the special education population across time. An analysis of the data reveals that the current special education population of 13.2% compares to its rate of 13.5% in 2004-2005. At present the special education population within the State is 13.1% and 12.6% for the District’s similar district group. It is notable that the District was at its lowest special education population in 2009-2010, with a special education population of 11.8%.

. The assignment of Social Workers to lead the RtI process is not considered optimal for a variety of factors, namely) they do not possess the background in learning and behavior theory that school psychologists do, which is a critical capacity to lead RtI teams. It was stated that the reason for this is that, given the time they devote to CSE process and associated diagnostic duties, the school psychologists do not have the time to have more active roles on the RtI teams.

CLASSIFICATION PRACTICES

. Although there were very few examples of students receiving special education services who did not meet the eligibility criteria, some questions arose with regard to the methods used to select a disability area, particularly pertaining to Emotional Disability and Learning Disability. With respect to the category of Emotional Disability, a substantial subset of these IEPs did not adequately identify areas of substantial social, emotional, or behavioral needs and their purported educational impact. Although these students did otherwise qualify for special education, their primary disability may have been misidentified.

. With respect to classification, as it pertains to the Specific Learning Disability category, it is notable that the methodologies at the elementary and secondary schools differ. The elementary schools are adhering to an RtI model and those at the secondary level are using the more traditional discrepancy model. The latter being attributed to the fact that RtI is not yet fully entrenched and thus the data from the SBIT process may not be used with the same level of confidence.

. Disproportionality is over-representation of minority students identified with a learning disability or other type of disability under the IDEA. When a minority group's numbers in special education are statistically higher than they should be, they are considered disproportionate. Although The District is to be commended for

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 12 | P a g e

its historical record of not having disproportionate representation for subgroups (e.g., African-American males) with a disability.

IN-DISTRICT INSTUCTIONAL PRACTICES AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

. Once identified, there is an impressive continuum of services for SWDs within the District, ranging from DCT to out of district placements. As it pertains to the special populations requiring more specialized programming (e.g., 8:1:1) classrooms, although these students are supported at the school level and are part of the “fabric of their schools,” one of the challenges to maintaining optimal vertical and horizontal alignment of these programs is their tendency to switch campuses “mid-stream” of the students’ elementary school experience. That is, students may need to go to a different school at grade 3 from the one they were at for grades K-2.

. A key metric to determine the horizontal alignment of special education services is to discern the linkage of student IEPs to Common Core Standards and grade-level expectations. As per the reviewers’ random review of student IEPs, the following salient results were gleaned from an instructional-perspective:

o On the whole, academic interventions were well supported by the norm-referenced evidence and performance levels reported. With a couple of exceptions, there were no concerns pertaining to placement along the continuum of the least to most restrictive environment.

o Poor alignment of academic goals to identified student need was noted in several instances. For example, IEPs would report substantial weaknesses in reading or math, yet did not have goals that addressed those areas of weakness.

With respect to related services, the following were particularly commendable:

o A strong negative correlation (-.78) between service minutes and student age suggests excellent adherence to the front loading model, whereby the greatest intensity of services are focused on younger students, and as students advance in age, service minutes gradually decline. The District’s adherence to this model can be best exemplified by a more in-depth analysis of speech/language service time.

o With some exceptions within the domain of S-LP therapy, goals tended to be adequately measurable. Some instances of vague goals and poorly defined target behaviors were observed; however, criteria across the related service domains were observed to be consistent with best practice. With respect to S- LP services, there were several IEPs within which substantial deficits in receptive and expressive language were revealed by testing and reported within student current performance; however, these areas were not appropriately reflected by the academic or speech/language goals.

. With respect to academic performance, other than the high school students making AYP for math, not one of the special education subgroups achieved AYP for the past three reported academic years.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 13 | P a g e

Figure 5. Adequate Yearly Progress Summary for the Past Five Academic School Years

ELA Grades 3-8 ELA H.S. Math Grades 3-8 Math H.S.

ASY 2008-2009 Made AYP Made AYP Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP ASY 2009-2010 Did Not Make AYP Made AYP Made AYP Made AYP ASY 2010-2011 Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP ASY 2011-2012 Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Made AYP ASY 2012-2013 Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Did Not Make AYP Made AYP

. Perhaps one of the most important, and least discussed, aspects of assessing student achievement is student graduation. Although the graduation rates (for the 5-year cohorts as illustrated in Figure 6) and drop-out rates are trending in a positive direction (as per the most recent cohort from NYSED), the graduation rate of SWDs remains about 12% lower than the State target. Consequently, there is an opportunity to further engage SWDs in other educational options inclusive of offerings to general education students inclusive of Career and Technical Education (CTE) and alternate programs (e.g., credit recovery).

Figure 6. Graduation and Rates among SWDs

Percentage of SWDs Graduating 50 40 30 20 10 0 2002 4 YR 2003 4 YR 2003 5 YR 2004 4 YR 2004 5YR 2005 4YR 2005 5YR 2006 4YR 2007 4YR 2007 5YR

Binghamton SDG

. Consistent with the findings from the authors’ review, the District has a strong record of ensuring students’ IEPs that include appropriate measurable post-secondary goals that are annually updated and based upon an age-appropriate transition assessment; transition services, including courses of study, that will reasonably enable the student to meet those post-secondary goals; and annual IEP goals related to the student's transition services needs; with evidence that the student was invited to the CSE meeting where transition services were

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 14 | P a g e

discussed and, if appropriate, a representative of any participating agency was invited to the CSE meeting with the prior consent of the parent or student who had reached the age of majority (New York State Education Department).

OUT OF DISTRICT PLACEMENTS

. Approximately 93 students with disabilities are placed in programs outside of the District. The vast majority of these placements are housed within a public setting, usually BOCES programs. The grouping of out-placed students is comprised primarily of those with primary educational disabilities of: Other Health Impairment (21), Emotional Disability (19), Autism (15), Learning Disability (14), Multiple Disability (12), Intellectual Disability (11) and, Speech/Language Impairment (1).

. A review of the IEPs for students in Out of District placements suggests that the students are being appropriately placed, and that as currently constituted, these placements are their LRE. Although staff have welcomed a “bring back” initiative, many stated that in some cases it was “too fast too soon” and would like greater capacity to support the complex behavioral-emotional needs of students who were (or are planned to be) brought back into the District. The importance of expanding building-based behavioral supports anticipates the forthcoming discussion of an organizational change with respect to the role of the school psychologists.

RECOMMENDATIONS

RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

. Perhaps in conjunction with the newly hired RtI coordinator and principals, identify a uniform and consistent behavioral intervention paradigm as part of the RtI framework. The District has adopted PBIS, and therefore it is recommended that the best possible methodologies and “language” be pulled from this, and rolled out to schools. In this manner, students that move from one school to another will be subject to a consistent and uniform program, thus yielding better results. Although it is typically thought of as an RtI framework, recent research has proven RtI’s utility to support the needs of students in non-traditional settings.

. As part of the re-structuring discussion vis-à-vis the school psychologists’ roles, it is a logical step to put them as leads on the RtI teams to replace the school social workers. The reasons for this recommendation are numerous, and include: (1) their knowledge of learning theory to support all members of the SBIT-RtI teams; (2) the inherent connection they have to the RtI process for students that may be referred for eventual testing; and (3) it will allow all psychologists to use the more progressive RtI framework for classification as it can be enhanced at both the elementary and secondary levels.

. As it pertains to improving the literacy component of RtI with existing resources, explore the possibility of purchasing an evidence-based computer system and one that is linked with Common Core standards. This will allow students to go to computer labs as part of a well-defined tiered intervention; from a physical plant perspective, many of the schools can support this as they are well-equipped with computers. Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 15 | P a g e

. Once RtI is more systematic and operational across all schools with respect to processes and procedures (e.g., high quality core instruction, timely/effective interventions, use of data to evaluate/problem-solve issues of student learning) it may be “reversed” (i.e., the RtI pyramid is in effect inverted) as a systematic step-down for students who are no longer eligible for IEPs.

Figure 7. Utilization of the “Step Down” from an IEP

Student A Student B

The expansion of RtI processes as a step-down approach will provide students with needed supports that do not need be under the aegis of special education, and perhaps appropriately reduce the number of students in special education. In order to establish “success stories” it is suggested that this initiative is beta-tested at a school with personnel that embrace this model and who can then present these successes in a public forum.

IN-DISTRICT INSTUCTIONAL PRACTICES AND STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

. Where possible and practicable, elementary programs supporting low incidence, high needs students (i.e., 8:1:1 and 12:1:1 programs) should remain at the same school for grades K-5. With the understanding that there will unforeseen circumstances, these multiple moves have an adverse effect on all students, especially students on the autism spectrum and with emotional disabilities, given their difficulty in adjusting to transitions.

. From a vertical alignment perspective, establishing a “point person” (e.g., a social worker) could provide oversight of the ED and ASD programs and represent the District at IEP meetings for students in OODs; in this manner, this staff member assuring optimal vertical alignment and personal connectivity with parents, advocates, current OOD placements, and other key stakeholders and ensure students appropriate for a bring back would have a successful transition back to the District. In addition, the staff member could facilitate access to a mental health provider who can support the medication component of students’ care and optimally to provide Wraparound community-based mental health supports. Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 16 | P a g e

. Establish reverse mainstreaming for all special classrooms. This will provide a meaningful platform to provide LRE opportunities. For example, this initiative has traditionally included a lunch bunch program, which allows typical students to eat with disabled peers and is a wonderful opportunity for the typical students to provide social role modeling in a naturalistic activity and milieu. In addition, a credit-bearing peer mentorship program at the secondary level will ensure that the peer interactions are systematic, meaningful, and interactive.

. It is recommended that the writing of quantifiable objectives that flow from Present Levels of Academic and Functional Performance and are implicitly linked to Common Core Standards be given the highest of priorities. Logistically, it is suggested that intensive PD for special education teachers occur simultaneously with mechanisms for oversight by CSE sub-chairs and CSE chairs. In this manner, capacity for the actual skill sets will be supplemented by requisite quality assurance, support, and oversight.

. As it pertains to engaging SWDs at the secondary level, and thus attenuating the significant dropout rate, consideration should be given engaging students through Alternative and Innovative Education programs (inclusive of CTE). In particular, the following warrant particular attention

o It is recommended that leadership build a cohesive communication plan, and then clearly communicate this plan to all stakeholders. Ensure that all programs are aligned to the District Strategic Plan and implement the Core Curriculum established by the District. It is notable that the District’s focus on strengthening Core Instruction is a key variable to consider.

o Provide elective options focused on specific areas of interest, career and vocational preparation, etc. should be monitored to ensure these traditional and non-traditional options offer students a meaningful pathway to educational success culminating with high school graduation.

o Establish a program review throughout the school year to provide staff with the necessary tools to change, improve, or eliminate programs due to the ever-changing landscape of public education and the needs of students in the programs.

o Create and implement a regular review process that identifies barriers to student success. This process should be completed on a three-year cycle. The results of this analysis shall inform the home schools regarding their ability to meet student needs as well as drive the addition, elimination, or targeted improvement of specific programs to maximize student outcomes.

o Develop a process to ensure that SWDs receive the necessary supports that are outlined within their IEPs (e.g., ensure that the program is fitting the needs of the student and not fitting the student to the program) and that guidance counselors ensure all students have the ability to engage in CTE experiences.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 17 | P a g e

Financial Review

MEDICAID

OVERVIEW

States receive the majority of federal funding for special education services through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), formerly known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (P.L. 94-142). The Act was intended to achieve four objectives (U.S. Department of Education, 1994):  Assure a Free Appropriate Public Education for all children and youth with disabilities;  Assure the rights of children and youth with disabilities are protected;  Help states and localities provide for early intervention and education services for children with disabilities; and  Assess and assure the effectiveness of these efforts.

The IDEA legislation authorized several federal grant programs to states to help them meet these objectives. The principle granting program under IDEA is Part B, which provides funding for elementary and secondary education services for children ages five through 21, as well as pre-school grants for children ages three to five. In addition, states are required to utilize all other existing federal, state and local funds available for the education of "handicapped children", without diminishing their existing financial commitments to special education (P.L. 94- 142). When the legislation was passed in 1975, the federal government was authorized to provide 40 percent of the average per-child costs for special education by 1982 (U.S. Department of Education, 1994).

During Fiscal Year 1993, the federal government provided $2.053 billion to the states to help finance services authorized under Part B of IDEA (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Federal per-child special education expenditures averaged $411 or 8.3 percent of average Part B expenditures for each of the 4.9 million children who received Part B services that year. These resources fell far short of the cost to states of the federal entitlement for special education.

Although the federal resources available for special education services have not reached the maximum authorized Congressional commitment, the population receiving special education services has increased by 40 percent since 1976 (U.S. Department of Education, 1994). With limited federal funding for education and growth in eligible populations, states have been under pressure to seek out sources of special education financing beyond state and local tax bases; one such source is Medicaid. An amendment to IDEA, included in the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988, clarified that Medicaid funds could be used to pay for health-related services provided under IDEA. For health-related services provided under IDEA to be reimbursed by Medicaid, they must be: 1) provided by a participating Medicaid provider, 2) medically necessary, 3) included in the state's Medicaid plan, 4) provided to an individual eligible for Medicaid and 5) screened for any other third party payment that may be available for reimbursement.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 18 | P a g e

Since 1988, states have been accessing Medicaid to help pay for health-related special education services. In this report, we present the findings of a study sponsored by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, undertaken to understand more about the nature and extent of State practices with respect to billing Medicaid for health-related services provided under IDEA. Subsequent to this discussion the authors describe the parameters pertaining specifically to the district including:  Eligible populations  Services provided  Financing and billing  Related policy issues

Nationally, there are a range of different approaches which states use to bill Medicaid for IDEA services.

FINDINGS

Claiming Processes

. The District utilizes the Public Consulting Group (PCG Health) to process their Medicaid claiming and cost reporting. According to the Cost Summary Report provided (71/2012-6/30/2013) and dated November 20, 2014, there were no Federal Funds being utilized for Medicaid eligible therapy services.

. The following represents the amount of Medicaid revenue the District has received over the past several years (based upon the data provided):

Medicaid Revenue 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 3 YR. AVE. Direct Service $ 652,932.00 $ 25,711.24 $ 71,458.11 $ 80,915.32 $ 130,460.05 $ 94,277.83 MAC $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total $ 652,932.00 $ 25,711.24 $ 71,458.11 $ 80,915.32 $ 130,460.05 $ 94,277.83

Direct Service

Direct Service

2014

. It appears that the District has billed for Direct Services only and not for any Medicaid administrative claiming (MAC).

. The District currently receives 50% of gross amount submitted and approved.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 19 | P a g e

. Based on those amounts reported, the District received a total of $130,460 in 2013-14. While we typically utilize the three year average as our estimate benchmark, as oftentimes because of timing, Medicaid revenues transcend fiscal years, in this case that average is not practical. We will therefore benchmark the potential revenue to that amount received in FY’2013-14.

. Because we are not using a total number of students in Special Services to create a beginning ratio of those receiving clinical services and then establish a percentage of Medicaid eligible from there - for this projection we will use a percentage of students receiving clinical services to set a Medicaid eligible rate.

GROUP SERVICES* 75% INDIVIDUAL SERVICES* 25% MEDICAID SPE RATE 74.80% FREE/REDUCED LUNCH RATE** 74.00% INDIRECT COST RATE ALL SPE RELATED SERVICES RECEIVED 100% STUDENT DAYS 180 AVER. STUDENT ATTEND. DAYS 166

*Unless otherwise stated **Based on community demographics appears understated.

. The rate of Medicaid eligible for the special education students clinically serviced is currently calculated at 74.8 %. Utilizing our own historical data for the frequency of individual to group services, we typically estimate a 25%/75% split for individual/group services. In this case we were able to extrapolate case load data from the various provider schedules. We therefore utilized the actual split determined from the District case load data and/or reports extracted from their special education student management software. In addition, we utilized a 9 month year, in order to accommodate any student or provider absences.

Therapy Case Load Data

Therapy Group Indiv.

Occupational Therapy 73.80% 11.50%

Physical Therapy 74.30% 25.70%

Speech/Language 83.50% 15.20%

. The following services were extrapolated from the Special Education Service Report provided by the District which identifies Medicaid eligible IEP services for SWDS:

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 20 | P a g e

Student IEP Services Frequency & Duration SERVICE ANNUAL SESSIONS MINUTES (15 Min.) 1:1 Nursing 118,800 7920 Adaptive Phys. Educ. 220,644 14710 Occupational Therapy 272,520 18168 Parent Counseling 20,340 1356 Physical Therapy 131,100 8740 Psych. Counseling 223,210 14881 Skilled Nursing 24,750 1650 Speech* 679,998 45333 Teacher of Hearing Impaired 5,400 360 Teacher Visually Impaired 17,200 1147

*Services must be provided or supervised by certified/licensed SLP.

NOTE: For the purposes of our calculation, students receiving multiple services, including both group as well as individual services may be double-counted.

IDEA GRANT UTILIZATION

. The following describes the amount of the IDEA grants over the past several years:

Grant 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 611 $ 1,628,465 $ 1,632,248 $ 1,612,227 $ 1,581,755 $ 1,678,811 619 $ 60,420 $ 77,736 $ 77,609 $ 63,468 $ 60,098 TOTAL: $ 1,688,885 $ 1,709,984 $ 1,689,836 $ 1,645,223 $ 1,738,909

611 619

2014-15

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 21 | P a g e

TOTAL IDEA $1,750,000 $1,700,000 $1,650,000 $1,600,000 TOTAL IDEA $1,550,000 5

The following describes the current utilization of the IDEA grants:

611 GRANT LINE ITEM AMOUNT Administrative $ 184,281.00 Teachers $ 671,682.00 Other $ 95,725.00 Support Staff $ 112,756.00 Purchased Services $ 178,622.00 Supplies/Materials $ 56,362.00 Travel $ 8,650.00 Employee Benefits $ 341,907.00 Total: $ 1,649,985.00

619 GRANT LINE ITEM AMOUNT

Support Staff $ 10,000.00 Purchased Services $ 43,650.00 Supplies/Materials $ 3,720.00 Total: $ 57,370.00

. Based upon the information provided in the IDEA grant applications, it appears that the District has utilized those funds in a manner appropriate to the needs of children with disabilities.

. The District reports that IDEA funds are not allocated for any services which would be eligible for Medicaid reimbursement.

. Special education administration should be commended for utilizing their IDEA grant for services which are not Medicaid eligible, thereby attempting to maximize the Medicaid revenue.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 22 | P a g e

MUNICIPAL MEDICAID POTENTIAL REVENUE ESTIMATE

. Based upon the preceding special education student IEP data, the following represents our estimate of the District potential Medicaid revenue:

BINGHAMTON MUNICIPAL MEDICAID DIRECT SERVICES POTENTIAL REVENUE

DIRECT STUDENT SESSIONS Eligibility REIMB. EST. ELIGIBLE SERVICES* ANNUAL Rate @ RATE*** REIMB. (ESTIMATED) 30/36 Weeks 74.8% Nursing Services** RN 1650 1234 $9.25 $ 11,416.35 LPN $8.00

Occupational Therapy 18168 Group (73.8%) 13408 10029 $14.33 $ 143,718.04 Individual (11.5%) 2089 1563 $21.32 $ 33,319.14

Physical Therapy** 8740 Group (74.3%) 6494 4857 $14.33 $ 69,606.22 Individual (25.7%) 2246 1680 $22.19 $ 37,282.37

Speech and Language Therapy**** 45333 Group (83.5%) 37853 28314 $24.85 $ 703,605.02 Individual (15.2%) 6891 5154 $50.57 $ 260,646.92 (Assume Certified/Licenses SLP) Audiology $78.87 $ -

Counseling Services* 1356 Group $24.50

Individual 1356 1014 $23.44 $ 23,774.91

Psychological Services* (LCSW) Group $27.35 Individual $27.97

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 23 | P a g e

Socia l Work Services* 14881 Group 11161 8348 $7.68 $ 64,114.49 Individual 3720 2783 $23.44 $ 65,227.59 Vision Services

Group Individual 1147 858 $0.00 $ -

Orientation/Mobility None Noted Group Individual $42.00 Teacher for Deaf 360 Audiology Evaluations None Noted $100.00

Interpreting Services None Noted

Special Education Transportation Can Not Claim $28.21 at Present

(2x per Week-Services) Annual Trips Rate = R.T.

Early & Periodic Screening, Diagnosis & Treatment Services (EPSDT)

SUB TOTAL: $ 1,412,711.03

AVERAGE SPE ATTENDANCE RATE 92% TOTAL: $ 1,299,694.15

Admin. Claiming (MAC) Temporarily Suspended 5.00% $ -

Cost Settlement Report

Indirect Rate 2.10% TOTAL: $ 1,299,694.15 District Share @ 50% $ 649,847.08

Notes:  Services must be specified and delineated in the child’s IEP and by providers employed or under contract to the LEA.  *For the purpose of school based counseling services, school psychologists and social workers must hold the required licensure.  **Eligible ONLY IF medically required.  ***Rates based on 15 minute sessions- Unless otherwise noted (less than 15 minute sessions ineligible).

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 24 | P a g e

NOTE: In 2010 the State of New York prevailed in a federal appeal of Medicaid eligibility for State certified/licensed speech teachers and was allowed to claim for speech services provided to Medicaid eligible students if supervised by an appropriately licensed Speech Language Pathologists.

The District transportation contractor currently utilizes EduLog® as its computer routing and scheduling software.

RECOMMENDATIONS

. The District reported that they do not currently bill for specialized transportation reimbursement due to being unable to provide the requisite student attendance data to support Medicaid reimbursement for specialized transportation to Medicaid eligible students.

. The District may wish to acquire a more robust computer routing software such as VersaTrans RP, which will be able to provide the requisite student attendance data required for Medicaid billing for specialized transportation services to Medicaid eligible students.

. The District utilizes First Student as their transportation contractor. First Student owns licenses for several computer routing software programs. The District should require that First Student provide and operate such a system on behalf of the District and provide the requisite documentation to support Medicaid billing for specialized transportation for those Medicaid eligible students with disabilities. Typical public school district transportation contracts generally require that the contractor provide information and data required by the District.

. The District reports approximately 8 Medicaid eligible students are also receiving specialized transportation services under the District contract with First Student. Based upon current rates of reimbursement, the approximate value of the potential reimbursement is approximately $10,000 annually.

. It is estimated that conservative potential revenue for Medicaid billing is approximately $649,847 annually, including billing for direct services and cost reporting and is likely to increase as additional Medicaid eligible students are identified and qualified. The total potential Medicaid reimbursement therefore represents approximately $519,387 more than their latest revenue amount of $130,460 for FY’2013-14.

NOTES: Medicaid administrative claiming (MAC) was suspended effective June 30, 2013 until further notice. The potential amount of Medicaid revenue is predicated upon 100% of the Medicaid eligible services being provided to 100% of the Medicaid eligible students. It would require 100% parental authorizations, 100% of the required doctors’ prescriptions and 100% provider documentation of all Medicaid eligible service delivery. From an operational perspective, 100% may not be practicable or attainable for a variety of operational limitations.

 

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York  25 | P a g e 

. Current Medicaid regulations require that a minimum of one District staff person be identified and trained relative to the School Based Health Services Program and Medicaid reimbursement.

. The District may wish to consider outsourcing their Medicaid billing program on a contingency basis. Public/Private consulting agencies typically receive 10-12% of the Medicaid funds they generate on behalf of the District. Any prospective Contractor should be required to maintain both general liability insurance with an errors and omissions clause to ensure that the Contractor and not the District is liable for any errors or overpayments. That Contractor should also be required to provide the requisite training to at least one District staff person (Special Education) who will be the primary liaison between the District and the Contractor. A sample contract is attached as Appendix D.

. The District reports (February, 2015) that they have attained all but 10 signed Parental Consent Forms which will allow Medicaid billing for those students who are Medicaid eligible receiving Medicaid eligible services. District staff should be commended for their diligence in attaining almost all of the Parental Consents for those children already identified as being Medicaid qualified.

. In the past the District may not have identified and claimed all Medicaid eligible special education students and Medicaid eligible services being provided to each of those students. Although there may be valid reasons for the current eligible students identified, i.e. failure of the District to obtain valid parental authorizations, services being provided by unlicensed personnel, incomplete records of services provide, etc.

. Based upon our review of both the District special education roster of services and the number and frequency of services being provided, as well as Medicaid eligibility rates for school districts of similar size and demographics it appears that the number of Medicaid eligible students should be slightly higher than the current Medicaid eligibility rate of 53.6 %. For the purposes of this estimate we have utilized the current District rate of 53.6 %, which is based on the current ratio of Medicaid qualified students in the District) of those special education students receiving special education services as being Medicaid eligible. Therefore, our estimate is likely to increase as additional Medicaid eligible students are identified and qualified.

. Frequently students are eligible for Medicaid but are not enrolled because their parents do not know about or understand the program or the application and enrollment process is perceived as too hard to navigate. Schools are the primary resource for identifying students who are eligible for Medicaid and other publically funded health insurance programs. The following are some innovative practices for enrolling children in the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) through the schools.

Every parent of a special needs child should be presumptive Medicaid eligible and should be asked to sign the parental authorization for Medicaid billing. This will eliminate the need to contact the parent in the future if the child is found, at a later date, to be Medicaid eligible and is receiving Medicaid eligible services.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York

26 | P a g e

. The Medicaid eligibility determination should be integrated into the special education in take process. To maximize enrollment in the Medicaid program the District should:  Routinely conduct outreach activities to inform children and families about the Medicaid program;  Investigate whether the child is eligible for Medicaid benefits; and  Assist children and families enroll in the Medicaid program.

. As part of the special education in take process, all parents should be asked to sign the Parental Authorization Form for Medicaid reimbursement. In the event that they become Medicaid eligible, the requisite authorization for billing would already be on file. The following will assist pupil services staff and special education administrators in maximizing their special education student eligibility:

 Special education administrator and pupil services staff should work with school principals to determine which outreach activities are allowed by school policy;  Cross reference Medicaid eligibility to the free/reduced lunch eligibility for special needs students and follow up with those parents with regard to their prospective Medicaid eligibility;  “Piggyback” on school efforts, such as PTA meetings, parent-teacher conferences, etc. to distribute information about the availability of public assistance under the Medicaid program;  Include Medicaid information and application in report card envelopes and back-to-school packets sent home with children at the start of the school year;  Determine if the school can add health insurance questions to mandatory health forms and free or reduced lunch applications;  Present Medicaid enrollment information at workshops and seminars for school staff;  Ensure that language assistance is available to non-English speaking parents who want to apply;  Identify a “point person” to answer any questions with regard to eligibility or the application process and assist prospective Medicaid eligible parents in completing the Medicaid application; and  Include the required Parental Authorization Form with all IEP and quarterly report forms, when updated authorizations may be required.

TRANSPORTATION

OVERVIEW

Binghamton is a city in, and the county seat of, Broome County, New York, United States. It lies in the state's region near the border, in a bowl-shaped valley at the confluence of the Susquehanna and Chenango Rivers. Binghamton is the principal city and cultural center of the Binghamton metropolitan area (also known as Greater Binghamton, or historically the Triple Cities), home to a quarter million people. The population of the city itself, according to the 2010 census, is 47,376. According to the United States Census Bureau, the city has a total area of 11.14 square miles 10.49 square miles of it is land and 0.65 square miles of it (5.83%) is water. The population density is approximately 4517 persons per square mile. For school transportation purposes, the District is considered to be densely populated and transportation efficiency may

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 27 | P a g e

determined by a variety of demographic factors other than student loading, such as traffic patterns, school bell schedules (tier time), route times and distance.

Binghamton is divided into seven neighborhoods , also known as Center City, is home to most of the city's largest buildings, and is home to government services. Located at the northeast corner of the river confluence, downtown is increasingly being populated by college students, and supports a flourishing arts scene. The North Side is across the Norfolk Southern rail tracks from downtown, lying along the . The North Side is a light commercial and working-class residential section of the city, with Chenango Street serving as its major artery. The East Side lies east of the , along the north bank of the . The neighborhood is largely residential with commercial corridors along both Robinson and Court streets, and contains pockets of industrial development along its borders.

Across the Chenango River lies the West Side, a primarily residential neighborhood along the banks of the Susquehanna, containing a combination of family homes, student housing, and stately mansions. Main Street forms the West Side's commercial corridor, made up of several large supermarkets, pharmacies, bank branches, pubs, restaurants, auto shops, and a few strip malls.[44] The First Ward is a largely residential neighborhood opposite the railroad tracks from the West Side, but is best known for Antique Row, a series of antique shops that line Clinton Street. Several gold-domed ethnic churches are located in this part of the city, as a result of settlement in the area by a large number of Eastern European immigrants. Ely Park is Binghamton's northernmost neighborhood, and contains its municipal golf course. It lies on portions of Prospect Mountain and other hills north of the First Ward.

FINDINGS

EFFICIENCY

. Based upon the routing and financial information provided, it appears that overall the District operates a relatively efficient school transportation operation.

. The following are the current school bell schedules and our calculated transportation (tier) times:

SCHOOL GRADES ENROLL. START A.M. TIER END P.M. TIER TIME TIME TIME TIME High School 9 to 12 1603 8:00 10 2:40 40 East Middle School 6 to 8 559 8:30 40* 3:20 60* West Middle School 6 to 8 692 8:25 35* 3:25 60* Benjamin Franklin Elem. PK-5 490 7:50 60 2:40 40 Calvin Coolidge School KG-5 369 7:50 60 2:40 40 Horace Mann School KG-5 372 7:50 60 2:40 40 MacArthur School PK-5 539 7:50 60 2:40 40 Theodore Roosevelt School PK-5 403 7:50 60 2:40 40 Thomas Jefferson School KG-5 345 7:50 60 2:40 40 Woodrow Wilson School KG-5 447 7:50 60 2:40 40

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 28 | P a g e

* Staggered start and end times allow for multi school scheduling.

. The District should be commended for having staggered starting and ending times for its middle schools. This allows the District to route and schedule for multiple schools, thereby increasing overall efficiency. The morning transportation tier time of 35-40 minutes may limit improved ridership efficiency of the morning routes; the afternoon transportation tier time of 40 minutes may limit improved ridership efficiency of the afternoon routes.

. School transportation efficiency is generally determined by the following factors:  Student Riders: Scheduled vs. Actual Riders (Student Loading)  Time available between school starting and ending times (Tiers)  A.M. routes generally drive the number of buses required, as more students ride in the morning than in the afternoon due to after school activities.  The person who does the routing and scheduling determines the number of buses required.

. Based upon demographic information, the District population density has a direct effect on the efficiency of school transportation services. Therefore, transportation efficiencies are dependent upon factors other than student loading, such as time and distance. Other factors which effect transportation cost and efficiency include whether the District operates a single or multiple transportation tier system, such as a two tier (high/middle school- elementary) or a three tier (high-middle-elementary) system. Additional factors may include mandatory walking distances for student who resides within a certain district identified school zone boundaries or whether the district transports all students.

. Given current industry standards and required student safety the following represents the safe seating capacity for school buses for the various student age groups:

Capacity 90 89 77 71 66 65 52 25 24 22 17 16 7

K TO 6 TIER 2 90 89 77 71 66 65 52 25 24 22 17 16 7

7 TO 12 TIER 1 60 60 50 48 44 43 34 16 16 14 10 10 7

* According to Accepted Industry Standards . School bus safety requires all students to be safely seated without legs in the aisle or blocking the bus aisle or rear emergency door. For upper grade students, this standard reduces the seating capacity to 2 students per seat. Current manufacturer 13” bus seats will not typically accommodate 3 students per seat for older students.

. The District operates a modified two tier transportation system: Tier 1: High School and Elementary Schools and Tier 2: Middle Schools. Given the route lengths and times, it appears that the 2 tier system may be the most cost effective and efficient without revising school bell schedules.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 29 | P a g e

. The District contracts with First Student which utilizes EduLog® routing and scheduling software. School Transportation is also provided via public transportation provided by BC Transit.

. The District reports that they have not been able to claim Medicaid reimbursement for any of the specialized transportation service provided to Medicaid eligible students. This is due to the inability of the software to provide the requisite student ridership/attendance data to support such billing.

 Not all routes have both an A.M. and P.M. route assigned.  Most buses operate routes for multiple schools.  The average route time in the A.M. is approximately 56 minutes and 1 hour 8 minutes in the P.M. routes.  More students are transported in the P.M. routes than in the A.M. (Difference= +87). Both scheduled loads and actual loads are higher in the afternoon than in the morning routes.  Actual student ridership is significantly less than the actual ridership.

. Although route load capacities are relatively low, the routes are operating within the times available for transportation; both tier times and bell schedules.

. Transportation management should be commended for scheduling and routing multiple schools whenever practical.3

TRANSPORTATION COST COMPARISONS

. According to NYSED State Financial Reports relative to school transportation costs, in 2011 the State average cost per pupil was $1,141 (not including ), which is 149% above the national average ($765.77). Historically, New York State school transportation represented 4.9% of District Budgets in 2001 and grew to represent 5.7% in 2010. In contrast, Binghamton’s school transportation budget represents approximately 2.88% of the total District budget.

RECOMMENDATIONS

. The District may wish to acquire a more robust computer routing and scheduling software, such as VersaTrans®, which will both support management route/driver oversight as well as provide the requisite data to support Medicaid billing for eligible students.

. A more robust routing and scheduling software program could provide management with the opportunity to better consolidate routes and eliminate up to 2 buses in the A.M. and 2 buses in the P.M.

3 Transportation management can sometimes “over consolidate” routes in order to eliminate a bus, only to have to reinstate it during the year or the following year due to required changes or routes which are too long. As a result an efficient transportation system requires some “excess” capacity in order to manage the route and schedule changes from year to year in order to not have to add a bus and driver during the year and after the budget has been set. This is especially true for specialized transportation, which changes almost daily based upon the transportation requirements of the students.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 30 | P a g e

SUMMARY AND FINAL COMMENTARY

The authors applaud the District staff in providing a myriad of student-centric supports to its students in a very challenging fiscal environment. As indicated in Figure 8, the District is spending more than $4,000 less per SWD than districts in its SDG and the State average. The following are provided to District leadership to continue to find ways to do “more with less”:

1. Re-structure the role of school psychologists.

2. Ensure that alternative education opportunities (e.g., CTE) are readily available to all SWDs.

3. Re-calibrate entry and exit guidelines for the related service providers that adhere to FAPE, LRE, and e ducational benefit.

4. Maximize all possible Medicaid revenues.

Figure 8. Comparison of Spending.

Relative Spending for SWDs 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Expenditures Per Pupil

District SDG State

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 31 | P a g e

SOURCES AND RESOURCES

American Physical Therapy Association. (2009). Guidelines: Physical Therapy Scope of Practice (Scope of Practice). Retrieved from APTA: www.apta.org

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2010). S-LP Caseload Characteristics Retrieved from ASHA: www.asha.org

American Speech and Hearing Association. (2010). Scope of Practice in Speech Language Pathology (Scope of Practice). Retrieved from ASHA: www.asha.org

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. Sections 12101 - 12213

Brown, J. G., Hemmeter, M. L., & Pretti-Frontczak, K. (2005). Blended practices for teaching young students in inclusive settings. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Chandra Keller-Allen. Superintendent Leadership: Promoting General and Special Education Collaboration. In Forum U.S. Department of Education. September, 2009.

Clayton, J., Burdge, M., Denham, A., Kleinert, H. L., & Kearns, J. (2006, May/June 2006). A four-step process for accessing the general curriculum for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Students, 38(5), 20+.

Donlevy, J. (2002). Teachers, technology and training: No Student Left Behind: In search of equity for all students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(3), 257+.

DuFour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IA: National Education Service

Essex, N. L. (2008). School law and the public schools: A practical guide for educational leaders (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Ferlazzo, L. (2009). Parent involvement or parent engagement? Website of the Day 5/19/09 http://www.learningfirst.org/LarryFerlazzoParentEngagement

Friend, M. (2013). Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School Professionals. Lynne Cook, California State University, Dominguez Hills

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York

32 | P a g e

Gartin, B. C., & Murdick, N. L. (2005). IDEA 2004: The IEP. Remedial and special education, 26(6), 327+

Gray, L. H. (2005). No Student Left Behind: Opportunities and threats. The Journal of Negro Education, 74(2), 95+.

Hall, S. (2007). NCLB and IDEA: Optimizing success for students with disabilities. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 33(1), 35+.

Hang, Q. & Rabren, K. (2008)An Examination of Co-Teaching: Perspectives and Efficacy Indicators Remedial and Special Education September/October 2009 30: 259-268.

Henderson, A.T., & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. National Center for Family & Community Connections with Schools. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.

Huefner, D. S. (2008). Updating the FAPE standard under IDEA. Journal of Law and Education, 37(3), 367+.

Hughes, Carolyn, et al. "" They Are My Best Friends": Peer Buddies Promote Inclusion in

High School." TEACHING Exceptional Students 31.5 (1999): 32-37.

Hyatt, K. J. (2007). The new IDEA: Changes, concerns, and questions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(3), 131+.

Imber, M., & Van Geel, T. (2010). Education Law (4th ed.). New York: Routledge. Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), at 20 U.S.C. Section 1401 (a) (22). Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA), at 20 U.S.C. Implementing Regulations at 34 C.F.R. Section 300.2 (15) (a), Section 300.24 (b) (15), Section 104.43, Section 104.37.

Jameson, J. M., & Heufner, D. S. (2006). “Highly qualified” special educators and the provision of a free appropriate public education to students with disabilities. Journal of Law and Education, 35(1), 29

Mandlawitz, M. (2007). What every teacher should know about IDEA 2004 laws and regulations. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 33 | P a g e

McConkey, R., Dowling, S., Hassan, D. and Menke, S. (2012), Promoting social inclusion through Unified Sports for youth with intellectual disabilities: a five-nation study. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research.

Means, J. (2006). The impact of IDEA 04 and NCLB on speech and language related services: How do we meet the challenges. Forum on Public Policy: A journal of the Oxford Round Table.

Mele-McCarthy, J. A. (2007). Approaches to assessment: IDEA and NCLB. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 33(1), 25+.

Moore-Brown, B. (2004). Becoming proficient in the lessons of No Student Left Behind. Perspectives on School- Based Issues, 5(1), 7-10.

Moore-Brown Barbara Case in Point: The Administrative Predicament of Special Education Funding. Journal of Special Education leadership. (2011) Vol 14, No.1

Muller, Eve. Reading First and Special Education: Examples of State Level Collaboration. Inform. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, D.C. (August, 2007).

Murray, C. & Pinata, R. (2009). The importance of teacher-student relationships in adolescents with high incidence disabilities. Theory into Practice, 46(2)

Occupational Therapy in school settings. (2010). Retrieved from www.aota.org

Parent Information Research Center. (2006). Involving parents: Best practices in the middle and high school.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504. United States Department of Education (http://www.ed.gov)

Shuman, D. (2004). American Schools, American Teachers: Issues and perspectives. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Various documents from New York Department of Education

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 34 | P a g e

APPENDIX A: WORKLOAD ANALYSIS

Explanatory Notes

1. FTE: Full time equivalent staff

2. Workloads are all student-directed activities that include both direct and indirect times and are used as opposed to caseloads given that workloads are a more valid metric to determine how the services providers are spending their time.

3. Direct services include therapy (individual or group) and consultation; “other” services are those such as preparation, paperwork, and non-travel activities.

4. A weighted statistic was used to account for the part time status of staff. For example a PT that works 1 day is a .2 FTE and if her caseload were 10, then her weighted caseload would be 50. Weighted does not refer to the intensity of the students on any given caseload, which presumably would be reflected in the direct time if a relatively lower caseload required a greater amount of therapy and consultation times.

5. The individual breakdown of each service providers’ time was calculated from weekly time studies and is reported as (actual) total weekly hours in each category and in percentages in the following pages.

6. A unit is defined as 30 minutes of treatment.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 35 | P a g e

Discipline Workload Summary - Speech and Language Pathology

Total Hours Analyzed 318

Number of Staff 11

Number Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff 10.6

Total Hours Minus Testing 312.5

Total Testing Hours ( % in italics) 5.5 1.7%

Total Direct Service Hours ( % in italics) 224.75 71.9%

Individual 34.25 15.2% Group 187.75 83.5% Consult 2.75 1.2%

Total Indirect Service Hours ( % in italics) 87.75 28.1%

Travel 8 9.1% Other 79.75 90.9%

Therapist Caseload Ranges MIN MAX caseload 29 46 weighted case 29 46

Therapist Workload Percentages

MIN MAX group 73 100 individual 0 27 consult 0 6 direct 50 83 testing 0 14 other 13 36 travel 0 17

AVG units/caseload caseload 31.7 2.46 weighted case 33.1 units 78.1

Individual Breakdown of Weekly Workload by Therapist

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 36 | P a g e

Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 4.5 4 4.5 4 2 19 0.90 9.00 9.00 21.00 individual 0 0 0 0 2 2 0.10 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4.5 4 4.5 4 4 21 0.70 22 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 0.5 1 0.5 1 1 4 0.13 travel 1 1 1 1 1 5 0.17 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 4 4 4 2.75 3.5 18.25 0.88 47.00 47.00 90.00 individual 0 0 0 1.25 0 1.25 0.06 consult 0 0.5 0 0 0.75 1.25 0.06 RTI direct 4 4.5 4 4 4.25 20.75 0.69 0 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 2 1.5 2 2 1.75 9.25 0.31 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units 141.0 group 3.5 4 4 4 4 19.5 0.78 49.00 49.00 0 individual 1.5 1 1 1 1 5.5 0.22 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 5 5 5 5 5 25 0.83 7 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 1 1 1 1 1 5 0.17 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3.5 4 4 3.5 4 19 0.84 31.00 31.00 99.00 individual 1 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 3.5 0.16 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 22.5 0.75 14 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 7.5 0.25 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3 3.5 3.5 3 3.5 16.5 0.73 27.00 27.00 68.00

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 37 | P a g e

individual 1.5 1 1 1.5 1 6 0.27 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 22.5 0.75 4 testing 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.02 other 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 7 0.23 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3.5 4 4 3.5 3.5 18.5 0.90 35.00 35.00 86.00 individual 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.07 consult 0.5 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.02 RTI direct 4.5 4 4 4 4 20.5 0.68 21 testing 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.02 other 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 8 0.27 travel 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 1 0.03 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3.5 3 3.5 3.5 3 16.5 0.75 28.00 28.00 66.00 individual 0.5 1.5 1 0.5 1.5 5 0.23 consult 0 0 0 0.5 0 0.5 0.02 RTI direct 4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 22 0.73 16 testing 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.02 other 2 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 7.5 0.25 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3 3 3.5 3 3.5 16 0.78 30.00 30.00 65.00 individual 2 0.5 0 1.5 0 4 0.20 consult 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.02 RTI direct 5 3.5 4 4.5 3.5 20.5 0.68 23 testing 0 0.5 0.5 0 0.5 1.5 0.05 other 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 7 0.23 travel 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 0.03 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3.5 4.5 0.5 3 4.5 16 0.82 29.00 29.00 90.00 individual 1 0 1.5 1 0 3.5 0.18 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4.5 4.5 2 4 4.5 19.5 0.65 19 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 38 | P a g e

other 1.5 1.5 4 2 1.5 10.5 0.35 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

SLP Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 4.5 2.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 19.5 0.91 42.00 42.00 98.00 individual 0 2 0 0 0 2 0.09 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 21.5 0.72 15 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 2 7.5 0.25 travel 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 1 0.03 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 0 0 3 1 5 9 1.00 22.00 37.00 35.00 individual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 0 0 3 1 5 9 0.50 0 testing 0 0 0 2.5 0 2.5 0.14 other 0 0 3 2.5 1 6.5 0.36 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 0 0 6 6 6 18 1.00

Discipline Workload Summary - Occupational Therapy

Total Hours Analyzed 130

Number of Staff 4

Number Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff 4.0

Total Hours Minus Testing 121

Total Testing Hours ( % in italics) 9 6.9%

Total Direct Service Hours ( % in italics) 78.25 64.7%

Individual 9 11.5% Group 57.75 73.8% Consult 11.5 14.7%

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York

39 | P a g e

Total Indirect Service Hours ( % in italics) 42.75 35.3%

Travel 2 4.7% Other 40.75 95.3% Therapist Caseload Range s MIN MAX caseload 23 55 weighted case 23 55

Therapist Workload Percentages

MIN MAX group 53 84 individual 0 19 consult 0 30 direct 44 78 testing 0 17 other 16 43 travel 0 3

AVG units/caseload caseload 39.8 2.11 weighted case 39.8 units 84

Individual Breakdown of Weekly Workload by Therapist

OT Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 2.5 2.5 1 3.5 3.5 13 0.84 23.00 23.00 42.00 individual 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 consult 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 0 2.5 0.16 RTI direct 3 3 2 4 3.5 15.5 0.44 200 testing 1 1 3 0 1 6 0.17 other 3 3 1.5 3 2.5 13 0.37 travel 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.01 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

OT Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units 116.0 group 3 2.5 3 4 2.5 15 0.81 55.00 55.00 0 individual 0.5 1 1 0.5 0.5 3.5 0.19 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 3.5 3.5 4 4.5 3 18.5 0.53 6

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 40 | P a g e

testing 0.5 0 0 0 1 1.5 0.04 other 3 3.5 3 2.5 3 15 0.43 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

OT Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units 137.0 group 4.5 0.5 3.5 0.75 3 12.25 0.53 49.00 49.00 0 individual 0 0.5 1 1 1.5 4 0.17 consult 1 3.25 1 0.75 1 7 0.30 RTI direct 5.5 4.25 5.5 2.5 5.5 23.25 0.78 0 testing 0 0 0 1.5 0 1.5 0.05 other 0.5 1.25 0.5 2 0.5 4.75 0.16 travel 0 0.5 0 0 0 0.5 0.02 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

OT Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 17.5 0.83 32.00 32.00 41.00 individual 0.5 0 0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.07 consult 0 0.5 0.5 0 1 2 0.10 RTI direct 4 4 4 4 5 21 0.70 22 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 2 1.5 1.5 2 1 8 0.27 travel 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 1 0.03 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

Discipline Workload Summary - Physical Therapy

Total Hours Analyzed 60

Number of Staff 2

Number Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff 2.0

Total Hours Minus Testing 58.5

Total Testing Hours ( % in italics) 1.5 2.5%

Total Direct Service Hours ( % in italics) 35 59.8%

Individual 9 25.7% Group 26 74.3% Consult 0 0.0%

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York

41 | P a g e

Total Indirect Service Hours ( % in italics) 23.5 40.2%

Travel 6 25.5% Other 17.5 74.5%

Therapist Caseload Ranges

MIN MAX caseload 31 51 weighted case 31 51

Therapist Workload Percentages

MIN MAX group 56 94 individual 6 44 consult 0 0 direct 57 60 testing 0 5 other 20 38 travel 5 15

AVG units/caseload caseload 41 1.62 weighted case 41 units 66

Individual Breakdown of Weekly Workload by Therapist

PTA Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units 102.0 group 3 3 2.5 3.5 4 16 0.94 51.00 51.00 0 individual 0.5 0 0.5 0 0 1 0.06 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 3.5 3 3 3.5 4 17 0.57 0 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 2.5 2.5 2 2.5 2 11.5 0.38 travel 0 0.5 1 0 0 1.5 0.05 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

PT Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 2 2 3 1 2 10 0.56 31.00 31.00 31.00 individual 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 2 8 0.44 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 3.5 3.5 4.5 2.5 4 18 0.60 0

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 42 | P a g e

testing 0.5 0 0 0 1 1.5 0.05 other 1.5 2 0.5 1.5 0.5 6 0.20 travel 0.5 0.5 1 2 0.5 4.5 0.15 Total Hours 6 6 6 6 6 30 1.00

Discipline Workload Summary - Social Work

Total Hours Analyzed 210

Number of Staff 6

Number Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff 6.0

Total Hours Minus Testing 210

Total Testing Hours ( % in italics) 0 0.0%

Total Direct Service Hours ( % in italics) 91 43.3%

Individual 74.5 81.9% Group 16.5 18.1% Consult 0 0.0%

Total Indirect Service Hours ( % in italics) 119 56.7%

Travel 0 0.0% Other 119 100.0%

Therapist Caseload Ranges* MIN MAX caseload 14 24 weighted case 14 24

Therapist Workload Percentages*

MIN MAX group 0 46 individual 54 100 consult 0 0 direct 21 84 testing 0 0 other 16 79 travel 0 0

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 43 | P a g e

AVG units/caseload caseload 19.3 N/A weighted case 19.3 units 18

SW Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 1 0.5 0 1 0.5 3 0.22 19.00 19.00 20.00 individual 3 1.5 2.5 1.5 2 10.5 0.78 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 4 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 13.5 0.39 2 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 3 5 4.5 4.5 4.5 21.5 0.61 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

SW Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0 2.5 0.33 NR NR NR individual 1.5 0.5 0.5 1 1.5 5 0.67 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 1.5 1 1 2.5 1.5 7.5 0.21 NR testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 5.5 6 6 4.5 5.5 27.5 0.79 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

SW Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 individual 1.5 1 0.5 3.5 2 8.5 1.00 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 1.5 1 0.5 3.5 2 8.5 0.24 0 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 5.5 6 6.5 3.5 5 26.5 0.76 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

SW Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 1 1 1 1 1.5 5.5 0.46 14.00 14.00 14.00 individual 1.5 1 1.5 1 1.5 6.5 0.54 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 2.5 2 2.5 2 3 12 0.34 0 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 4.5 5 4.5 5 4 23 0.66 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 44 | P a g e

SW Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 NR NR NR individual 6 6 4.5 6.5 6.5 29.5 1.00 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 6 6 4.5 6.5 6.5 29.5 0.84 NR testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 1 1 2.5 0.5 0.5 5.5 0.16 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

Service Mon Tues Wed Thurs Friday Totals %s Caseload Weighted Units group 0.75 1.5 1.75 1.5 0 5.5 0.28 24.00 24.00 NR individual 2.25 2.25 2.5 3 4.5 14.5 0.73 consult 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 RTI direct 3 3.75 4.25 4.5 4.5 20 0.57 29 testing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 other 4 3.25 2.75 2.5 2.5 15 0.43 travel 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Total Hours 7 7 7 7 7 35 1.00

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 45 | P a g e

APPENDIX B: COMPUTERIZED ROUTING PARAMETERS

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Satellite views must be displayable on any map, including during the route building process.

Satellite views must scale automatically as the map scale is altered.

Stores long street names (up to 40 characters) Displays non-transportation-related features such as waterways, railroads, etc.

Displays icons for schools and other landmarks.

Map Editing Functions Allows multiple users to be editing the map simultaneously (with appropriate user rights). Includes an Undo function to undo individual actions back to the last save. Includes all map editing functions in the same program as the routing functions, not requiring the user to start a different editing program. Allows the user to be able to add or modify streets and house numbers in the system without vendor intervention.

Provides the ability to digitally draw new roads in ways that can appropriately scale the entered roads (describe the system’s capabilities). Encoded Map Data Encodes transportation data, such as one-way streets, travel speeds, no travel roads, etc. Does not allow any bus to travel on any street in a way that contradicts the underlying transportation/road rules. Allows the simultaneous application of attributes (speeds, one-way, etc.) over a series of map segments, rather than only a segment at a time. Stores different speeds for different directions on the same road (such as uphill and downhill). Stores different speeds based on time of day. Automatically uses the correct speed for the time of day a bus is traveling streets with variable speeds. Encodes travel restricted streets that can restrict larger

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future vehicles yet allow smaller ones. These restrictions should be automatically applied during routing so that the operator cannot inadvertently make a mistake on such roads. Encodes turn restrictions that are automatically used whenever routes are being built. Encodes turn restrictions based on size of the vehicle. Encodes stop locations as currently used/approved for the district. Allows the user to add notes to a bus stop (or other location), indicating on the map where such annotated stops/locations are. Allows the user to add notes on streets that might be temporarily closed. Provide the ability to add a new school or a new academic program without having to create completely new sets of stops for that school or program. Student Data Student Data Fields System shall use the student ID as found in the district’s student information system. System shall have the ability to assign ID numbers to non- district students such as Private Schools, if there is not appropriate ID number in those student records. In addition to the home address, the system shall allow for multiple addresses for a single child (i.e., different AM pickup, different PM dropoff). Allows for different pickup/dropoff addresses on different days. Allows for storage of a mailing address that may not be the same as the home address. Stores the school of attendance. Stores the school of residence (which may differ from school of attendance, as in Magnet programs). Stores emergency contacts with phone numbers and a note indicating the relationship of the contact to the

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future student. Allows the user to enter notes in paragraph form. Stores a photograph of the student. Imports photographs (in batch or individually) from the student information system, a file or photo CD (indexed by ID). Stores a Family ID code and uses that code to group students into families. System should use the Family ID to allow the user to apply changes made to one student other students in the same family (where appropriate and at user discretion) without having to open each student record. Importing Student Data Provides the ability to establish periodic, unattended downloads form the District’s student information system into the software. This is above and beyond any initial download that is used to begin the software installation. Accepts ASCII downloads in fixed-field, comma delimited, or tab-delimited formats. Provides the user the ability to preview the import prior to running to verify that it will import properly. Processes downloaded data during the import process to geocode students and assign each student to the appropriate walk/ride status, bus stop, and school (according to the established system rules). Processes downloads such that any address corrections the Transportation Office has made are preserved, even when the same student is downloaded with the same incorrect address another time. Processes downloads with field level intelligence rather than overwriting a blank field in the download where the Transportation Office has data in the receiving field. The system should be capable of parsing house numbers from the street name if the district's database does not

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 48| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning

System Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future store the two separately. Exports data to other systems (ASCII, ODBC, SIF). Geocoding System automatically geocodes students, individually or in batch, based on their house number and street name. Automatically accepts standard variations, such as ST/Street, AV/Ave/Avenue, etc. Automatically recognizes as simultaneously valid situations where a single street is known by more than one name (i.e. State St/Route 5), allowing either (or any listed) name to be a match for the map. Accurately locates a student where the same address occurs more than once in the map (i.e. two addresses of 50 Main St in different communities). Allows for manual geocoding. Student Safety Features Encodes map streets so as students are assigned to stops, students will automatically be prevented from walking across hazardous roads to reach a bus stop, even if that stop is closer to their home than another. Allows the encoding (for street-based hazards) to be set at multiple user-defined grade levels so that the user- selected grade sets may have the hazard applied, or not applied at user discretion Encodes roads (such as major thoroughfares or streets with other types of hazardous conditions) so that any student living on that road automatically receives a curb- to-curb stop. Encodes roads so that students living on that road are automatically set to require right-side pick-up and drop- off without further user intervention. Automatically assign a student to a specific safe corner, as determined by the district. Automatically restrict particulars corners (but not others) so that students cannot be automatically assigned to that corner. Stores the locations of sexual predators on the electronic map.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 49| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Store predator’s name, along with notes and records of offenses. Stores a user-defined “threat zone” or radius around the predator’s location. Displays sexual predator locations on the electronic map with the associated “threat zone.” Entering a new predator location automatically notifies the user of current bus stops within the “threat zone,” even if no visible indication of predator locations has been displayed. Entering a bus stop on the electronic map automatically checks to see if that stop is within a “threat zone.” If it is, the user is automatically notified. The system should automatically discern stops or stop placement inside the threat zone without relying upon the user visually recognizing and manually avoiding such stops. As the system imports new students, all new locations and stop locations are also checked against the predator threat zones and the user should be notified of any conflicts.

Transportation Assignments: Schools Automatically determines the appropriate school where the student’s academic program allows assignment by boundary. Allows for Open Enrollment, Magnet, and/or Private Schools where the student is allowed to attend without reference to an enrollment boundary. Automatically assigns walk/ride status based upon the school of attendance rather than only the school of residence (the home school). Transportation Assignments: Bus Stops Allows for multiple schools to use a single location (such as a corner or other collector stop) as a bus stop, without requiring multiple stops at that location for each school.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 50 | P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Automatically determines the appropriate school and walk/ride status based on the boundaries, grade range, and academic program. Automatically determines the appropriate bus stop for transportation eligible students, based on user-defined maximum walk-to-stop distances. System lists the bus stop corner (or directional) to which the student is assigned, i.e. 45 Broad St (NE), where the (NE) indicates the northeast corner. Automatically responds to routing changes and maintains the appropriate corner indication based upon the way the bus approaches the bus stop.

System automatically allows the user to assure that the same stop is assigned morning and afternoon, even if a closer stop is available on one of the routes. System uses a rule set to automatically provide curb-to- curb stops for students meeting the rules. Allows for simple creation of a curb-to-curb stop for any student. Provides the ability to manually override any automatic bus stop assignment. When desirable, the user should have the option of assigning any manually selected bus stop. Transportation Assignments: Bus Runs/Routes Automatically assigns students to a bus servicing their bus stop which will take the student to the appropriate school at the appropriate time. Automatically assigns students to transfer buses where a student must ride more than one bus to arrive at the appropriate school. Automatically assigns appropriate students to shuttle routes, such as where a defined group of students attends one school for an hour, then shuttles to a different location. Tracks and assigns students where there might be different bell times on different days of the week (such as one day a week early dismissal).

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 51| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning

Special Needs: Extra Data Elements and Routing Functions Stores the special equipment needs of the student, allowing for multiple requirements (i.e. wheelchair and air conditioning). Stores student-specific extra loading time to be added to a route for this student (i.e. an ambulatory student using a walker). This time should be added to the route time automatically when the student is placed on the route, and appropriately removed if the student is no longer on the route.

Provides the ability for a student to attend\System multiple schools on different days, or even on the same day. Contains a comment field that prints on the driver directions where specific instructions for the student may be stored. When a new student is added to an existing run/route, the system should automatically indicate if any conflict between the student’s equipment needs and the equipment available on the currently assigned bus. Scheduling Future Student Changes Allows for future changes to a student’s address and/or transportation needs to be scheduled for the date on which changes are to occur. Allows for a future change to have a termination date as well as an initiation date. Allows for continuous alternate scheduling, such as where one week a child would be picked up according to the mother’s address on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, but Tuesday and Thursday the father’s address. The next week would be Monday, Wednesday and Friday at the father’s address and Tuesday and Thursday at the mother’s (frequencies at the discretion of the user/parent request.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 52| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning

Included Optional, Not Explanation in additional Available/ quoted price Future price System

All changes in transportation pursuant to the scheduled changes will be visible on the record with the change, and show the assignments that will be used unless route changes are made in the interim. All changes to student transportation requests will automatically occur in the week containing the change date. The user should be able to enter batch change requests, such as changing all students in a particular school to an early out schedule on a given day. Student Filter Functions System will allow the user to search for student records on any of the displayed student fields. System allows the user an easy way to enter the model against which the search will filter (i.e. selecting students for one or more schools, one or more grades, etc.) Allows the user to create customized filters linked with and/or clauses. Allows the user to store commonly used filters with a name and to call up that filter by the stored name. Easily filter students whose home location is not (or is) located on the map. Easily filter students inside or outside of any selected boundary. Easily find a student by name and name of the bus driver. Easily find students whose ride time exceeds an input number of minutes. Find any student whose transportation information (such as bus stop, bus number, route/run number, or time at the bus stop) has changed since the last time notifications were printed. Student Rollover Function Transportation personnel must be able to grade advance students to begin work on the next year's routes without altering the routes (or students) for the current year or creating a separate database.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 53| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future User-initiated grade-advance (rollover) that moves the student from grade to grade, school to school, and stop to stop (if district rules require such a changed based on the new grade level). This must be a single process, not requiring multiple iterations. The official district rollover data may be imported into the data used for next year’s routes without altering any current routes. Routing Functions Basic Routing Functions Automatically creates a visual display of bus stops when selecting the school/schools the routes serve. The user should not have to manually load multiple layers to prepare for routing.

Automatically indicate the number of students at any stop, with a system indication of those waiting to be picked up as well as those that might already be picked up on any given bus route. Visually display the side of the street from which a student has approached the bus stop in order to make manual route decisions to minimize students who must cross the street to get to their stop. Appropriately assign students to bus stops that are visually indicated as right-side stops. System will not pick up a student at a right-side restricted stop unless the user intentionally overrides the rule (and subsequent to a warning of the exception to the rule). Allow students for different schools to be on the same bus at the same time, tracking their arrival times at the appropriate schools. All routes are created and immediately represented following the allowed travel paths. The system will automatically determine the best time- path from one mouse click to the next, always representing real over-the-road travel.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 54| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Automatically updates student information (bus stop/ride time, etc) when they are included on a route. Encodes a user-defined "sit time" where a bus must arrive at a school at one time and leave after a specified time. This shall be automatically calculated into the route coupling functions. Allows the user to add students to any route on an ad hoc basis, such as a No Child Left Behind student who must ride the local bus and transfer. Allows the user to display any or all routes (including a mix of morning and afternoon routes) on the map simultaneously and edit any selected route. Allow examination of the route at any point, displaying the students liable to be on board at that point, along with critical demographic information (name, birth date, phone number). Also run the same report for students yet to board the bus. Provides the ability to play back the bus travel path. Prevents the system of creating a turnaround in the middle of the road (with a manual override if necessary). Allows the user to create designated turnaround locations (used automatically), giving the appropriate time and distance for a route including the time and distance to and from the turnaround point.

Creates afternoon routes by creating a copy or a mirrored version of the morning route. Allows for multiple pick-up/drop-off points as schools. A single point might service two or more schools, or a single school might have more than one desired service point. While on the same map used to build/report bus routes, the user should have the ability to mark a street as closed (perhaps due to construction) and have the system automatically reroute both the visible route and any other route traveling over that section of the road (even when not displayed). Integrates with Google maps to enable the router to

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 55| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future virtually drive the route along the photographic representation of the map. What-If Functions for Routes Creates what-if scenarios without altering current routes. Saves multiple what-if scenarios in the same database, not requiring any replication of the database to hold and store such scenarios. Map changes made in one routing scenario automatically appear in all what-if scenarios without any user intervention or maintenance routines. Creates a complete picture of a what-if scenario, including both the routes and the fleet schedule that would be used to run those routes. System shall have the ability to define students and schools and have the system automatically generate an efficient route, according to user-set parameters. System shall allow the user to select preset styles of optimization, ranging from cluster stops (urban routing) to routes optimized for low loads and long distances (such as Special Needs or rural routes). Special Needs Routing System shall handle all Special Needs routing within the same software and same database as regular education routing. System allows users to find subsets of the Special Needs students at a given school to be identified for separate transportation (such as transporting students with behavioral development issues separately from other special needs students attending the same school at the same time). Graphically displays the location (and number) of students at a stop with specific equipment needs, such as wheelchairs. Automatically warns of a mismatch between the equipment on the vehicle and the equipment needs of a student being loaded onto that vehicle. Automatically warns the user when the capacity of any special equipment for the assigned bus has been

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 56| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future exceeded. Automatically updates the route time appropriate to the time required (user-defined) for a student to be loaded into the special equipment on a particular bus. Assigns named monitors and/or aides to routes.

System should have the ability to create different routes for different days, as required. Allows mainstreaming of particular special needs students on regular education buses. Allows for the user to assign a regular education student to a special needs bus when desirable (such as a sibling of the special needs student). Scheduling Route Changes System should allow routers to work on next week’s routes without making changes to any routes running in the current week. The transition from the planned routes (for next week) to the current routes shall be automatic and without manual intervention. The system will allow routers looking at routes for the following week to see and route students whose scheduled changes will occur during that week. Route Filtering Abilities Find any bus/route that passes by a point or bus stop and then be able to filter the search results by the time of day. Find any bus/route that passes over a selected section of a road, and allow the results to be filtered by whether the route is inbound or outbound. Find and easily display any rout or set of routes (including mixes of morning/afternoon and different schools). Find any route that has been changed since the last time directions were printed for the drivers. Route Coupling Automatically creates a graphic display of routes assigned (or to be assigned) to vehicles. The graphic display should represent the length of each routes and the scheduled

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 57| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future time it is to be run. Provides for easy drag and drop changing of assigned bus or start times. Automatically uses real map-based times and distances to calculate the available time between any two routes. Automatically notifies the user of any changes in the schedule that may have caused an inability of routes to be run in the time allowed. Provides a means of automatically generating route couplings according to user entered parameters, attempting to minimize the number of vehicles, times, and mileage. Provides the user a tool to automatically find the best bus to which a new route might be assigned. System should not allow any manual or automatic assignment that would require violation of underlying road rules (typically the size of the vehicle allowed on a particular road). System should not allow any manual or automatic assignment that would link a bus route to a bus that could not handle the various equipment needs of students assigned to that route. Displays a five-day schedule, accounting for changes occurring on specific days. System will automatically move all day’s routes when the route is moved on one day, where the route is run the same way and at the same time each day of the week. System should allow for routes to have a different time scheduled for a given day a week, even if the path of the route has not changed (such as early out days). Routes may be linked to assure that regardless of manual or automatic reassignment, the same students will be serviced by the same driver, morning and afternoon. Changes made on the fleet scheduling screen automatically update all parts of the system. What-If Functions at the Fleet Level The user should be allowed to view the entire fleet, or create a window representing only a select portion of the

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 58| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future fleet (i.e. that services a particular school or set of schools, different contractors, special needs routes only, etc.) The user shall be able to model the entire fleet for any What-If scenario of routes, combining all into a coherent and complete model. Allows the user to automatically optimize selected portions of the fleet (such as a particular garage) without altering schedules for other vehicles. Automatically calculates and displays the daily and weekly hours for each bus’s assignments. Analyzes fleet costs according to user-defined variables such as per bus or per mile. Allows the user to model any desired change in bell times. Analyzes the costs associated with changes in bell times. Management Features Displays current information on students not located on the map without running a report. Displays current information on students who require transportation but who have not been assigned transportation in the software without running a report. Displays current information on routes exceeding an individual-route-specific target time without running a report. Displays current information on routes exceeding an individual-route-specific target load without running a report. Displays current information on routes that are under an individual-route-specific load threshold without running a report. Displays current information on any vehicles where the capacity for special equipment has been exceeded, without running a report. Displays current information on employee certifications that are coming due within a time period that may be set for each certification tracked, without running a report. Displays current information on employee certifications

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 59| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future that are past due without running a report.

Displays information on conflicts between routing assignments and sexual predator locations (based on a user-defined radius from the predator’s address) without running a report. Displays current information on any students requesting shuttle transportation where that request has not been satisfied in the system, without running a report. Transportation Specific Reporting Prints stop lists with or without student names (at user discretion). Prints left/right instructions for drivers with or without student names (at user discretion). Allows scheduled printing of driver direction sheets. That is, the user may set a time for printing, and the print run will be completed even in hours when the transportation office is not open. All reports for drivers include the distance from one stop to the next, or from each turning movement to the next. System will reasonably establish the stop times and total times for each route, using the speeds and time of day settings in the map. All stop lists and/or driver directions are immediately available following any route change. Changes to the map that might add points to a street will not require all directions to be reprinted for routes traversing that street. Indicates the pick up or drop off corner for the route. Allows district-selected student data to be printed with each student. Allows the student photograph to print with the student's name, by stop. Allows indication of whether a student must cross the street to arrive at their bus stop (listed with each student). Allows the user to edit and save the templates to create

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 60| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future custom Driver Directions/Stop lists, including the ability to

change fonts, sizes, and locations of certain types of information. Automatically print notifications for the driver to indicate railroad crossings or other road-based hazards. Prints route sheets singly, or in user-selected batches. Prints names of monitors and/or aides on routes. Map Printing System allows the user to quickly print any route map for a driver, including direction arrows and route statistics. Prints route maps singly, or in user-selected batches. Prints maps with student-specific data, such as location and safe walk path. Supports plotters for large maps. Allows the user to plot the entire map or any section of the map. Allows the user to indicate the map features to display on the plotted map. Allows the user to generate labels that follow the street for a higher quality plotted map. Employee Data Tracks employee data, including name, address, multiple phone numbers, photo, assigned vehicle, and Social Security number. Stores and tracks time sensitive certifications, both required and optional. Vehicle Data Stores a record for each vehicle in the district and an indication of whether it is in active user or not. System will not use inactive vehicles in any manual or automatic assignment scheme. Allows any vehicle to be associated with a contractor who owns/operates it. Stores the location where each vehicle is parked overnight and during the day (allowing for park outs or multiple garages).

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 61| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning

System Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Stores basic vehicle data as might be required by the State. Stores special equipment associated with the vehicle, including the number of students who may be loaded onto that vehicle prior to exceeding capacity for each type of special equipment. Boundary Drawing and Editing System should have tools to for precision boundary drawing and editing, including: attaching to specific locations on a street or boundary and following a street or boundary. Displays boundaries an outline or with a fill color, at user discretion. System can link boundaries such that editing one can automatically produce the appropriate change in the adjacent boundary. All boundaries should be created, maintained, and employed in the same system as the routing functions, without the need to import or translate the boundaries in any way. The system may use a single boundary to make different types of assignments. For example, the same boundary may serve as both a school and walk zone for school where all students walk to that building. What-If boundaries may be used with the what-if capabilities of the routing system to provide a picture of the transportation response to any change. Boundaries may be hidden or displayed, at user discretion. Boundary Planning and Redistricting Analysis Planning Boundaries and Student Data Residence locations of selected students may be displayed on the map and color-coded according to user-selected criteria. System counts students in selected boundaries by unlimited user-defined categories such as grade, GPA, ethnicity, etc.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 62| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

System may assign non-contiguous boundaries to a single school. Small boundaries may be aggregated and counted as individual boundaries, or as the aggregate. System should include tools for forecasting future student populations. Counts may be run according to the forecast population in the selected boundary or boundaries. System can generated a report indicating all students (of particular grade ranges) falling inside a selected boundary. Creates a hard copy report showing address that fall within selected (or all) schools. Planning Boundaries and Buildings Stores both real and hypothetical buildings and their real or potential locations. Buildings store the grade levels assigned to that building and the number of rooms assigned per grade. Multiple scenarios may be stored with the buildings having different grade/room configurations in each. Students inside a boundary or aggregate boundary may be "loaded" into the building to discover the percent capacity used in that building.

System can save the workspace; consisting of the boundaries, students, forecast factors, and building scenarios. Implementation Services for Routing Software The vendor will work with the district to provide an electronic map that represents known streets in the district, even if not available on the base electronic map. Vendor will provide high and low address information for each block (data permitting). Vendor will enter all school information including addresses, grades, and bell-times. Vendor will enter district boundaries. Vendor will enter district walk-to-stop distances. Vendor will enter all bus stop locations.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 63| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

Vendor will mark school bus travel restricted streets by bus size, according to district instructions. Vendor will mark all hazard locations according to district instructions. Vendor will mark all cross-restricted streets, according to district instructions. Vendor will mark all right-side restricted streets, according to district instructions. Vendor will enter current enrollment and walk zone boundaries, according to district instructions.

Vendor will provide maps with the indicated data for district review prior to training. Vendor will create a customized student database, taking into account district needs, and import all students. Vendor will conduct an initial address match of student information against the map file and correct errors not requiring district knowledge. Vendor will correct student geocoding issues that do not require district knowledge. Training for Routing Software Vendor will train district staff on their own live and operational data. Vendor will provide at least some of the training onsite. Please supply a brief description of the training plan. Vendor will have a system in place for future addition onsite or online training, as might be needed. Specifications for Ridership Analysis Software Included Optional, Not in quoted additional Available/ price price Future Explanation Integration with Ridership Verification Hardware Please indicate the hardware systems your software supports.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 64| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

Included Optional, Not Explanation in quoted additional Available/ price price Future

If the system uses a physical card to identify the student as they enter the bus, nothing should be saved on the card that might allow someone finding the card to locate the student. Students should be accounted as they enter and exit the bus. The system should compare scans on and off and notify the operator of ambiguous scans (such as a scan on but not off). The system should be able to report in real time or historically, the time and location of a student’s scan on/scan off. The system should be able to note when a student has boarded/deboarded the bus at any stop other than the one to which the student is assigned. In the case of an accident, the system should be able to generate a list of the students who scanned on and have not yet scanned off. The system should be able to generate a report of students assigned to ride, but who have not ridden for a proscribed time. The routing systems should be able to receive that information and adjust the planned ridership for that route.

The system should include a search function for finding the scan on/scan off activity for any student or set of students. Integration with Routing Software The routing software should be able to maintain an association between a student record and the card (or other method) used to scan on or off the bus.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 65| P a g e

Specifications for GPS Hardware

General System Requirements This proposal seeks a single source solution for hardware and software required to meet the District specifications.

This proposal requests an inclusive price for hardware (including mounts, connectors, wiring), software (including training and support), and any continuing subscriptions. All of these should be covered through contract with the same vendor. The vendor must offer an open design capable to interfacing with both routes and stops in the districts routing and other transportation software. Indicate the routing software that can integrate data from this hardware.

GPS should include the ability to directly interact with multiple GPS satellites, track each vehicle at all times within a 50’ radius of the vehicle’s absolute location.

Capable of handling all current district buses and allowing for growth (including significant growth, should that occur).

The software license should cover an unlimited number of users, controlled by the district.

The District shall own all hardware and accumulated data. Hardware Configuration Technical specifications must be included for any and all components proposed. Ten seconds or less acquisition time.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of 66| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

The GPS hardware must have an integrated accelerometer

Indicate the types of vehicle data the unit may monitor, for example directional signals, red and yellow overheads, open doors, etc. The GPS hardware should be programmable based on the District’s needs. These settings should be modifiable once the units are installed on the vehicles and in operation by Over The Air (OTA) procedures. The users should be allowed to perform these modifications through an interface provided by the GPS tracking software.

The system should easily communicate with and transmit data from Onboard Diagnostics.

The system should have the ability to attach additional peripherals as might be needed, preferably through a standard USB connection. Telecommunication Capabilities The system should support GSM or CDMA cellular for live data transmission. The selected hardware should send data automatically, without user intervention. The hardware must target a zero-loss system by storing all data until there is verification that the data have been received. The hardware will not erase any data unless there is confirmation that the data have been correctly transmitted.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 67| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

The hardware must promote zero-loss data capture by being capable of store and forward technology. It must be capable of storing at least 30,000 logs (about 3 weeks of school bus data) per device if circumstances prevent transmission of the data for whatever reason. These logs must then be transmitted automatically when correct communication is established. The hardware must be capable of real-time uploading data based on events, exceptions, and activities as well as timed uploads. The hardware should manage the decisions for uploading depending on the importance of the data waiting for transfer. The live communication function must send all scheduled or event-driven vehicle tracking data directly to the selected hosting network option in real-time, automatically and without user interaction. Software Capabilities General Software should provide benefits through either a single program or seamlessly integrated programs. The software must be capable of processing the amount of GPS data generated by the full fleet of the School District and should be able to display data as they are transmitted by the GPS hardware in real time. The system must store data for every bus for each day for as long as the District decides is needed, and allow for archiving and purging of historical data through a user interface which allows storage or deletion by date range. The system must allow the display, analysis, and reporting on historical run/stop

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 68| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

data for any day and time frame available from the data stored. The District prefers the option to have the vendor host the data or to have the data hosted on a District server. Hosted data will be stored in a secure environment. System will use SQL Server as the underlying database. System will have a browser interface for the data. The District can configure the software to monitor specific desired events without vendor intervention. The district shall have the ability to create audible in-vehicle, real-time warnings alerting the driver that they are outside set operating parameters (for example, exceeding maximum speed or exceeding maximum idle time). The software should be capable of displaying recorded vehicle speeds against the posted speed limit. Onboard Diagnostic Reporting The software shall collect and interpret data from Onboard Diagnostics (OBD) to allow district personnel to quickly interpret fault indications. The software will message indicated personnel if a low battery level is indicated. The software will message indicated personnel if an oil pressure setting is exceeded. GPS Unit Reporting System will display vehicle location on an electronic map System will allow satellite overlay on the

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 69| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

mapping display. System will display one, selected, or all vehicle locations on a common screen and store tracking information for later Theretrieval. system should allow for user defined groups of vehicles, which may be displayed as a group. The system shall allow for vehicle playback with fast forward and rewind Thecapabilities. system shall locate events on the map, such as idling events. The system shall allow the user to create geofences and establish the rules for reporting against those geofences. Management Data Reporting Software analyzes telematic data to provide for a report of the manageable idle time, rather than all idle time. Software provides speed profiles for a vehicle. Software audits fuel levels, filling locations, and times. Software interprets the GPS data and provides improved accuracy for Softwaremileage. interprets the GPS data and provides reports on maximum speeds, or speeds within certain geographic Softwareareas. allows for accurate event reconstruction in case of an accident. Please indicate the capabilities and methods for achieving this goal. The system shall allow for customized reports. The system shall allow the user access to all received data in order to generate custom reports. The system shall have certain automatically

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 70| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

generated reports (indicate which). The system shall be capable of email notification of alerts to appropriate personnel. Driver Performance and Safety Reporting System provides reports for driver training by tracking a driver’s hard braking, acceleration, and fuel economy practices. Installation Requirements The installation should not interfere with the function of the electronics of the vehicle. All mounting of equipment should be in such a way as to not damage the vehicle and secured in such a manner as not to present a danger to the occupant in the unlikely event of an accident. Training and Support Complete system operation manuals shall be provided which include details of all system features and functions The vendor will supply support for hardware issues. Describe the process. The vendor will supply both phone and web- based interactive support for the software, as needed. There shall be no extra charge other than that included in the service agreement declared in this proposal.

Specifications for AVL Software Included Optional, Not in quoted additional Availab le/ price price Future Explanation Vehicle Display Please indicate the GPS hardware with which the proposed AVL software will work. The AVL software must be able to

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 71| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

simultaneously display and process GPS data from multiple GPS hardware vendors. The system should have the ability to display the current location (as of the last GPS report) for any vehicle, all vehicles, or a selected subset of vehicles. The system should allow the user to request the current location for any vehicle. The system should allow for a visual and/or audio alert to be associated with the displayed vehicles. The system should allow for an audible alert to be set according to user preferences to sound when the alert occurs, whether the vehicle is displayed or not. The user should be able to quickly display any vehicle that is in an alert status, including zooming in to a closer view of the map showing that location. The display map should be capable of displaying satellite photography of the region of interest. Geofence Functionality The system should be able to create any number of geofences. Each geofence may be associated with a single vehicle, all vehicles, or a selected subset of vehicles. Any geofence may be set to track a vehicle that enters the geofence or if it leaves the geofence, depending upon the function performed by the geofence. For example, a geofence might be set at some distance around the district and route buses would trigger an alert if they left the boundary/district.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 72| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

The system should allow the user to establish rules for safety compliance at railroad crossings, and read and interpret the GPS data to create a report capturing the compliance or non-compliance of each vehicle at that railroad crossing. Integration with Ridership Verification Hardware Responses indicate software capability, with the options for hardware either now or in the future Please indicate the hardware systems your software supports. The system must be able to simultaneously display and process ridership data from multiple hardware vendors. The system should be able to report in real time the time and location of a student’s scan on/scan off. The system should be able to report historical records of any student’s presence on a bus. Integration with Student Information The system should be able to integrate with the assignments of students to bus routes through the routing software. The system should be able to look up a student and return the routing information pertinent to that student which may be compared to the GPS data for that route. The lookup of student/route information should be available on current as well as historical GPS data. The system should be able to compare the scheduled pickup time for a particular student against the current day’s or any historical day’s record of pickups. When data from the GPS allow, the system

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 73| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

should be capable of noting when a vehicle passed by a stop and whether or not a user- indicated stop action occurred (defined in the GPS system). When received data allow, the system should allow the user to look up a student and see up to the last twenty records of when they physically scanned on/off the bus. The system should be able to generate a stop list for a route indicating when a student has boarded/deboarded the bus at any stop other than the one to which the student is assigned. The system should be able to produce a stop list indicating both the planned students at each stop, and the record of those boarding/deboarding the bus at that stop. The system should be able to generate a report of students assigned to ride, but who have not ridden for a proscribed time. The system should be able to generate a report showing student activity on buses, with an indication of the scan time, the planned location, and the actual location of that student’s scan on/off the bus. Integration with Planned Bus Routes The system should be capable of comparing the current GPS-reported vehicle path to that which the user’s routing software planned for that vehicle. The system should be able to run an off-path report to indicate which vehicles deviated from the planned path. The systems should be able to determine the percentage of the route where the vehicle was off path.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 74| P a g e

Specifications for a Computerized Routing and Boundary Planning System

The system should be able to simultaneously display the planned route, the actual route, and indicate the portion for which the route was off path. The system should be able to report on the departure times from the yard compared to the scheduled departure time, indicating the number of minutes a vehicle was early or late compared to the planned departure time. This report should be available for the current day, any historical day, or any set of days. The system should provide a visual display of the current on-time status to a selected location. The system should provide a visual display of the current on-time departure from a selected location or locations. The on-time arrival or departure display should color code the display of buses running late, indicating the severity of the delay. The on-time arrival or departure display should update with real time changes, so that a vehicle that was running late to a school might change the color code if it is able to make up time. Conversely, increasing delays would also create a change in the color code.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 75| P a g e

APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION FOR MEDICAID

PRESCHOOL/SCHOOL SUPPORTIVE HEALTH SERVICES PROGRAM (SSHSP) Schedule of Eligible Services and Payment Rates (2010)

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 76| P a g e

B inghamton2015 Futures City Education Schools Educational of New York Services Analysis 77| P a g e

amton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 78| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 79| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 80| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 81| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 82| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 83| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 84| P a g e

Medicaid in Education Alerts

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 85| P a g e

Bingha mton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 86| P a g e

Bingha mton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 87| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 88| P a g e

2015 Futures Education of New York mton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 89| P a g e

2015 mtonFutures City Education Schools Educational of New York Services Analysis 90| P a g e

Bingha mton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 91| P a g e

Bingha mton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 92| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 93| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 94| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 95| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 95| P a g e

n City Schools Educational Services Analysis ures Education of New York

104 | P a g e

SAMPLE CONTRACT

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 97 | P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 106 | P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 99 | P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 100| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 101| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 102| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 103| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 104| P a g e

Binghamton C ity Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 105| P a g e

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 106| P a g e

NEW YORK SCHOOL BASED HEALTH SERVICES Medicaid Reimbursement

In New York, school districts may claim reimbursement under Medicaid for the following services provided to Medicaid eligible students with disabilities:  Physical Therapy  Occupational Therapy  Speech Pathology/Therapy  Psychological Counseling  Skilled Nursing Services  Targeted Case Management Reviews (TCM)  Basic and Comprehensive Psychological Evaluations  Audio logical Evaluations  Service Coordination  Specialized Transportation Services

NOTE: Orientation and Mobility and Vision Services are not yet approved for Medicaid reimbursement by the State of New York.

NOTE: Although Medicaid Administrative Claiming (MAC) was approved for reimbursement in 2013, the implementation of MAC was delayed in June 2013 and then reapproved in December 2013 (See Attached Appendices-Medicaid in Education Alerts).

Medicaid Administrative Claiming (MAC)

Allowable Medicaid Administrative Activities Include:  Facilitating Medicaid Outreach  Facilitating Medicaid Eligibility Determination  Translation Related to Medicaid Services  Medicaid Related Training  Referral, Coordination and Monitoring of Medicaid Services

Employee and Contractor categories that are eligible to participate in the MAC Administration Only Random Moment Time Studies (RMTS) include but are not limited to:  Administrators  Pupil Support Service Administrators  Pupil Support Technicians  Special Education Administrators  Special Education Support technicians  School Psychologists  School Social Workers  Orientation and Mobility Specialists

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 107 | P a g e

 Special Education Teachers  Special Education Supplementary Personnel (Teacher Aides/Assistants)

MAC Claims are generally filed quarterly (See Attached Medicaid Alert Issue # 13-01)

These services must be provided by qualified professionals (providers), either under contract to or employed by the School District. TCM is a comprehensive service which includes coordinating medical and non-medical procedures for students.

The New York Department of Health (DOH) has developed a monthly fee schedule for services that School Districts provide to eligible students with an Individualized Education Program (IEP). Using this schedule, School Districts submit claims for the gross amounts eligible for reimbursement. Districts then receive federal reimbursement for approximately 50% of the approved amounts. Since the State is entitles to 50% of the reimbursement sent to the School District (50% of the claim), the State withholds its share from School District’s future state aid. Districts receive approximately 50% of Medicaid revenue share for those services provided to Medicaid eligible special education students.

The Preschool/ School Supported Health Services Program (SSHSP) was developed to assist school districts in obtaining Medicaid reimbursement for certain diagnostic and health related supportive services for students with or suspected of having disabilities. The program is administered jointly by the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) and the New York State Education Department (NYSED). The NYSDOH is the single state agency responsible for administering New York’s Medicaid program and is responsible for setting Medicaid policy and reimbursement rates for the SSHSP. The NYSED is responsible for implementation of SSHSP and setting special education policy.

Prior to October 1, 2011, in order to receive Medicaid reimbursement, school districts must adhere to billing requirements. Services provided under SSHSP are reimbursed based on the SSHSP Medicaid fee schedule.

Effective October 1, 2011, in order to receive Medicaid reimbursement, school districts must adhere to billing requirements and services will be cost reimbursed. Payments received for dates of service on or after October 1, 2011 will be subject to the cost reimbursement methodology. Any payments received for services prior to October 1, 2011 will not be subject to a cost reimbursement and cost settlement process.

NOTE: The cost report is service date driven not date of payment driven.

An annual Medicaid cost report must be filed by each district by December 31st annually. All Medicaid cost reports will cover a full fiscal year corresponding to the period July 1-June 30. Medicaid costs will be calculated through a series of calculations using the submitted annual cost report. School districts will continue to be reimbursed on an interim basis based upon the Medicaid fee schedule. Medicaid costs will be compared to the Medicaid interim payments and a settlement will be calculated for each school district.

In order to participate and bill for services under SSHSP, school districts must participate in the Random Moment Time Study (RMTS). School district coordinators must provide rosters of employees eligible to bill for Medicaid services. Eligible employees must then complete their RMTS when required. Results from the RMTS are used to identify the proportion of allowable and reimbursable direct service time under Medicaid to be used for SSHSP cost reporting. The RMTS will determine the amount of Medicaid reimbursement generated through the SSHSP. Only those employees listed on the school district roster are eligible to participate in the cost settlement process. Contractors are not included in the RMTS and should not be included on the school district rosters. The RTS is used to determine the on average how

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 108 | P a g e

much time direct medical service providers spend delivering direct medical services. The percentage is called the “direct medical percentage” and is used to calculate the direct medical service costs.

Medicaid allowable costs and cost report data must include only costs related to special education, must relate to a direct medical service, specifically those services included in the approved State plan and must be required in the student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP).

The Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has established the types of costs that are eligible for cost reimbursement under the SSHSP and outlined the methodology in which these costs are allocated and apportioned to the Medicaid program. CMS has approved a cost reimbursement methodology that includes 9 elements for direct medical services and 7 elements for specialized transportation services.

Medicaid Allowable Costs & Cost Report Data Elements for Direct Medical Services:  Salary costs for eligible SSHSP service providers employed by school districts  Benefit costs for eligible SSHSP service providers employed by school districts  Approved direct medical service material and supplies  Depreciation costs for medical service materials and supplies  Random Moment Time Study percentages  Contractor costs for eligible SSHSP service providers  Non-Public school tuition costs  School district indirect cost rates  Individualized Education Program (IEP) ratio (ratio is the total number of Medicaid eligible special education students with a prescribed direct medical service in their IEP divided by the total number of ALL special education students with a prescribed direct medical service in their IEP)

NOTE: School districts are required to report gross expenditures and then reduce those expenditures for funds paid from federal funding sources, i.e. federal grant funds.

Specialized Transportation Reimbursement (See Attached Medicaid Alert Issue # 13-10)

For dates of service on or after September 1, 2013, in order to be Medicaid eligible the following criteria must be met:  The specific medical need for specialized transportation to accommodate the student’s disability must be documented in the students’ IEP;  A description of the vehicle and its specific modifications which serve the needs of that student with a disability must be documented in the IEP;  The student must be travelling to/from a Medicaid eligible service; and  Special education students who travel on a regular bus, without modifications are not eligible for Medicaid reimbursement.

Medicaid Allowable Costs & Cost Report Data Elements for Specialized Transportation Services:  Salary costs for eligible specialized transportation service providers  Benefit costs for eligible specialized transportation service providers

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 109 | P a g e

 Approved specialized transportation non-personnel costs  Depreciation for approved specialized transportation non-personnel costs o Lease or rental costs o Insurance costs o Maintenance and repair costs o Fuel and oil costs o Purchases under $ 5000 o Contract costs for transportation services and transportation equipment  School district indirect cost rate  Specialized transportation ratio (Ratio is total number of IEP students receiving specialized transportation services divided by total number of ALL students receiving transportation services- specialized or non- specialized)  One way trip ratio (Ratio is total number of Medicaid one way trips divided by total number of ALL one way trips specialized or non-specialized)

NOTE: Medicaid administrative cost claiming (MAC) has been temporarily suspended as of November 2013 (See Medicaid Alert 13-13 -Appendices, Page 36)

Reference: School Based Health Services Medicaid Cost Report and Cost Settlement Training, New York State Department of Health, Presentation to School Business Officials, Public Consulting Group, Inc. 148 State Street, Tenth Floor, Boston, MA 02109

NOTE: Recent regulations (IDEA Part B) regarding parental authorizations for Medicaid reimbursement now require a one-time written consent from the parent written notification to the child’s parents prior to accessing the child’s public benefits (Appendix A).

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 110 | P a g e

APPENDIX D: DISTRICT DEMOGRAPHICS

Binghamton is a major junction in the Interstate Highway System, much as it was during the days of the railroad. Interstate 81, a major north-south route, connects the city to Syracuse and Ontario, as well as to Pennsylvania and Appalachia. Binghamton also serves as the western terminus of , which gives a direct route to Albany. , the Southern Tier Expressway, is in the process of being upgraded to Interstate 86, and spans the southern border of New York, providing access to New York City, as well as to the western Southern Tier and Erie, Pennsylvania. Between 1953 and 1966, the state constructed an arterial system to alleviate traffic, which includes the Brandywine Highway (), North Shore Drive (New York State Route 363), and the portion of the Vestal Parkway (New York State Route 434) within city limits Other major thoroughfares in the city include Chenango Street, Main Street (New York State Route 17C), and Court/Front Streets (U.S. Route 11).

Public transportation in Binghamton and outlying areas is served by B.C. Transit, a daily bus service provided by Broome County. Binghamton University students are also served by Off-Campus College Transport. Intercity buses originate from the Greater Binghamton

Transportation Center, which was opened in 2010 and also serves as the B.C. Transit hub.[141] provides direct routes to Buffalo, Syracuse, Rochester, Scranton, , and New York City. Buses offer service to Olean, Ithaca, Utica, Albany, New York City, and . Trailways of New York also has direct service to Albany and Rochester.

Finding: Based upon demographic information, the District metropolitan area is considered to be densely populated for school transportation purposes. Therefore, transportation efficiencies may be dependent upon factors other than student loading, such as time and distance.

The public Binghamton City School District has 5,911 students enrolled PK-12, and is the largest school district in the metropolitan area. The district consists of Binghamton High School, two middle schools, and seven elementary schools. While the district maintains an International Baccalaureate program and has received several academic awards, it is classified as high needs, and has had difficulty meeting several educational requirements. The Catholic Schools of Broome County, a private district run by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Syracuse, operate Seton Catholic Central High School and an elementary school in the city of Binghamton.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 111 | P a g e

The District schools are:

Binghamton High School 31 Main Street Binghamton, NY 13905

East Middle School 167 East Frederick St Binghamton, NY 13904

West Middle School W Middle Ave Binghamton, NY 13905

Macarthur School 1123 Vestal Ave Binghamton, NY 13903

Benjamin Franklin Elementary School 262 Conklin Ave Binghamton, NY 13903

Woodrow Wilson School 287 Prospect St Binghamton, NY 13905

Theodore Roosevelt School 9 Ogden St Binghamton, NY 13901

Horace Mann School 30 College St

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 112 | P a g e

Binghamton, NY 13905

Calvin Coolidge School 261 Robinson St Binghamton, NY 13904

Thomas Jefferson School 151 Helen St Binghamton, NY 13905

Given the geographic size of the District, the schools are located relatively close in proximity.

The following describe the current District policies relative to student walking and transportation limits: • Elementary School Students (K-5) 1 mile • Middle School Students (6-8) 1.5 miles • High School Students (9-12) 2 miles

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 113 | P a g e

APPENDIX E: TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION

Binghamton is a major junction in the Interstate Highway System, much as it was during the days of the railroad.

Transportation Budget Analysis Fy’ 2013-14

LINE ITEM APPENDIXADJUST. D: DISTRICTAMOUNT DEMOGRAPHICSAMOUNT TOTAL BALANCE BUDGET EXPEND ENCUMB. EXPEND.

Supervision $ 65,485.26 $ 65,485.26 $ - $ 65,485.26 $ - Summer Enrichment $ 21,060.14 $ 21,060.14 $ - $ 21,060.14 $ - Insurance $ 13,509.00 $ 13,508.62 $ - $ 13,508.62 $ 0.38 High School Science-Priv. Car $ 1,205.00 $ 1,203.10 $ - $ 1,203.10 $ 1.90 High School Field Trip $ 2,000.00 $ 755.00 $ - $ 755.00 $ 1,245.00 Frank Field Trip $ 7,216.00 $ 4,960.15 $ 283.80 $ 5,243.95 $ 1,972.05 Jeff Field Trip $ 7,202.06 $ 6,319.92 $ 275.42 $ 6,595.34 $ 606.72 HorM Field Trip $ 3,500.00 $ 3,383.70 $ 88.02 $ 3,471.72 $ 28.28 Transport Field Trip $ 5,991.02 $ 3,157.12 $ 259.64 $ 3,416.76 $ 2,574.26 CalvC Field Trip $ 5,516.00 $ 3,224.56 $ - $ 3,224.56 $ 2,291.44 MacA Field Trip $ 5,560.29 $ 5,286.78 $ 109.64 $ 5,396.42 $ 163.87 WoodW Field Trip $ 5,129.35 $ 2,335.80 $ 72.22 $ 2,408.02 $ 2,721.33 High S Guidance Transport $ 1,530.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 1,530.00 Transport Field Trip $ 16,159.00 $ 11,603.64 $ 78.36 $ 11,682.00 $ 4,477.00

Athletic Trips $ 201,000.00 $ 147,233.34 $ 3,324.21 $ 150,557.55 $ 50,442.45 Contract Transport $ 2,253,711.58 $ 2,200,916.60 $ - $ 2,200,916.60 $ 52,794.98 Contract Equip Repair $ 92.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 92.00 Contract Transport Postage $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ - $ 100.00 $ - Contract Transport Veh Expense $ 138,000.00 $ 132,361.01 $ 5,037.20 $ 137,398.21 $ 601.79 Public Transport $ 243,506.00 $ 242,549.00 $ - $ 242,549.00 $ 957.00 TOTAL: $ 2,997,472.70 $ 2,865,443.74 $ 9,528.51 $ 2,874,972.25 $ 122,500.45

. At year end 2013-14, transportation expenditures were approximately $ 122,500 less than budgeted, with the greatest area of savings the Athletic and contracted transportation line items.

. Excess transportation budget capacity is a sound business policy. The current excess represents approximately 4.3% of the current year budget and is an acceptable amount based on current industry standards.

With a moderate excess capacity, transportation is able to accommodate the varied route and student placement changes during the school year.

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 114 | P a g e

APPENDIX M

Route Analysis – A.M. Routes

ROUTE NO. BUS SEATING START END ROUTE STUDENT STUDENT CAPACITY SIZE CAPACITY TIME TIME TIME LOAD LOAD (Terminal to Termin al) SCHED. ACTUAL

31 35 35/23 7:07 7:28 0:21 31 32 23 31 35 35/23 7:44 9:19 1:35 18 13 35

33 35 35/23 6:55 8:20 1:25 11 4 23 33 35 35/23

50 W.C. 15 8+4 6:59 8:13 1:14 10 12 10

51 72 72/48 7:23 8:20 0:57 6 8 72

52 72 72/48 7:10 8:32 1:22 17 16 72

53 72 72/48 7:25 9:24 1:59 14 6 48

54 72 72/48 7:27 8:53 1:26 7 5 48

55 72 72/48 6:51 8:00 1:09 25 21 48 55 72 72/48

56 72 72/48 6:36 7:25 0:49 37 18 48 56 72 72/48 7:25 7:50 0:25 29 25 72

57 W.C. 17 15+2 6:50 8:32 1:42 8 4 15

58 72 72/48 6:47 7:25 0:38 24 14 48 58 72 72/48 7:25 7:45 0:20 15 12 72 58 72 72/48 8:00 8:15 0:15 0 72

59 72 72/48 6:54 7:54 1:00 50 31 48 59 72 72/48 72

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 115 | P a g e

60 72 72/48 6:50 7:15 0:25 21 40 48 60 72 72/48 7:15 7:45 0:30 39 40 72

61 72 72/48 7:04 8:08 1:04 34 29 48

62 72 72/48 6:25 7:46 1:21 30 13 48 62 72 72/48 7:58 8:05 0:07 0 72

63 72 72/48 6:40 7:25 0:45 14 18 48 63 72 72/48 7:17 8:15 0:58 7 72

64 72 72/48 6:50 8:08 1:18 32 19 48

65 15 15 6:47 9:19 2:32 18 16 15

66 35 35/23 7:10 9:04 1:54 8 7 35 66 35 35/23 35

67 72 72/48 7:14 8:10 0:56 6 5 48 8:20 9:15 0:55 2 2 72

68 72 72/48 7:27 8:23 0:56 20 8 48

69 72 72/48 7:08 7:25 0:17 29 16 48 69 72 72/48 7:50 8:40 0:50 14 3 72

70 72 72/48 6:54 8:44 1:50 9 5 48

73 72 72/48 6:44 7:41 0:57 21 7 48 73 72 72/48 7:49 8:50 1:01 3 7 72

163 72 72/48 6:58 7:40 0:42 30 29 48 163 72 72/48 7:42 8:29 0:47 34 23 72

39 12:42 673 508 1943

METRICS A.M. ROUTES Average Routes/Bus 1.56 Average Route Time 0:56 Average Sched. Load 17.3

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 116 | P a g e

Load/Capacity Ratio 34.6% Average Actual Load 13.0 Load/Capacity Ratio 26.15%

Route Analysis – P.M. Routes

ROUTE NO. BUS START END ROUTE STUDENT STUDENT CAPACITY SIZE TIME TIME TIME LOAD LOAD (Terminal to Terminal) SCHED. ACTUAL

31 35 2:23 3:00 0:37 31 19 23 31 35 3:20 3:46 0:26 17 13 35

33 35 1:34 3:33 1:59 19 7 23 33 35 3:40 3:58 0:18 0

50 W.C. 15 2:19 3:27 1:08 8 5 10

51 72 2:10 3:19 1:09 6 8 48

52 72 1:30 3:38 2:08 15 14 72

53 72 1:30 3:01 1:31 18 10 48

54 72 1:30 3:04 1:34 5 3 48

55 72 2:35 3:30 0:55 29 21 48

55 72 3:30 4:40 1:10 25 19 72

56 72 2:40 3:01 0:21 25 21 72 56 72 3:01 3:37 0:36 42 48 72

57 W.C. 17 1:48 3:33 1:45 16 6 15

58 72 2:29 3:07 0:38 28 25 48 58 72 3:07 4:45 1:38 28 24 72

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 117 | P a g e

58 72

59 72 2:28 3:00 0:32 27 32 48 59 72 3:00 3:30 0:30 28 72

60 72 1:44 3:18 1:34 43 47 48 60 72 3:18 3:45 0:27 21 47 72

61 72 2:20 3:39 1:19 36 15 48

62 72 1:59 2:21 0:22 1 48 62 72 2:40 3:56 1:16 58 34 72

63 72 2:29 4:07 1:38 38 15 48 63 72

64 72 2:22 3:37 1:15 57 33 72

65 15 1:50 4:27 2:37 14 13 15

66 35 1:30 3:03 1:33 8 5 23 66 35 3:25 4:11 0:46 11 8 35

67 72 1:20 2:52 1:32 2 2 48 2:45 4:14 1:29 15 11 72

68 72 1:35 2:54 1:19 21 10 48

69 72 2:10 2:46 0:36 14 3 48 69 72

70 72 1:43 3:37 1:54 8 6 48

73 72 2:01 2:44 0:43 0 73 72

163 72 2:25 3:10 0:45 27 32 48 163 72 3:25 4:22 0:57 37 39 72

36 16:57 778 595 1691

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 118 | P a g e

METRICS P.M. ROUTES Average Routes/Bus 1.44 Average Route Time 1:08 Average Sched. Load 21.6 Load/Capacity Ratio 46.0% Average Actual Load 16.5 Load/Capacity Ratio 35.2%

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 119 | P a g e

A.M. ROUTE LOADING ANALYSIS

ROUTE NO. 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 67 68 69 69 70 73 73 163 163 STUDENT LOAD SCHED. 31 18 11 10 6 17 14 7 25 37 29 8 24 15 50 21 39 34 30 14 7 32 18 8 6 2 20 29 14 9 21 3 30 34 STUDENT LOAD ACTUAL 35 23 4 12 8 16 6 5 21 18 25 4 14 12 31 40 40 29 13 18 5 19 16 7 5 2 8 16 3 5 7 7 29 23 CAPACITY 35 23 23 10 72 72 48 48 48 48 72 15 48 72 48 48 72 48 48 48 72 48 15 35 48 72 48 4 72 48 48 12 48 72

80 70 60

50 STUDENT LOAD SCHED. 40 30 STUDENT LOAD ACTUAL 20 CAPACITY

10

0

1 1 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 9 9 0 3 3

3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7

163 163

P.M. ROUTE LOADING ANALYSIS

ROUTE NO. 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 66 67 67 68 69 70 73 73 163 163 STUDENT LOAD SCHED. 31 17 19 8 6 15 18 5 29 25 25 42 16 28 28 27 43 21 36 58 38 57 14 8 11 2 15 21 14 8 0 0 27 37 STUDENT LOAD ACTUAL 19 13 7 5 8 14 10 3 21 19 21 48 6 25 24 32 47 47 15 34 15 33 13 5 8 2 11 10 3 6 0 0 32 39 CAPACITY 23 35 23 10 48 72 48 48 4 72 72 72 15 48 72 48 48 72 48 72 48 72 15 23 35 48 72 48 48 48 0 0 48 72

Binghamton1 City1 3 Schools0 1 Educational2 3 4 Services5 5 Analysis6 6 7 8 8 9 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 0 3 3

3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7

2015 Futures Education of New York 163 163

120 | P a g e 2

A.M. ROUTE TIME ANALYSIS

ROUTE NO. 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 67 68 69 69 70 73 73 163 163 ROUTE TIME 21 95 85 74 57 82 ## 86 69 49 25 ## 38 20 60 25 30 64 81 45 58 78 ## 114 56 55 56 7 50 ## 57 61 42 47 STANDARD 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60

160

140 120 100 80 ROUTE TIME

60 STANDARD 40 20 0 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 63 63 64 65 66 67 67 68 69 69 70 73 73 163163

P.M. ROUTE TIME ANALYSIS

ROUTE NO. 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65 66 66 67 67 68 69 70 73 163 163 ROUTE TIME 37 26 119 68 69 69 91 94 55 70 21 36 105 38 98 32 94 27 79 22 76 98 75 157 93 46 92 89 79 36 114 43 45 57 STANDARD 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60

200

150

100 ROUTE TIME

STANDARD 50

Binghamton City Schools Educational Services Analysis 2015 Futures Education of New York 0 123 | P a g e 31 31 33 50 51 52 53 54 55 55 56 56 57 58 58 59 60 60 61 62 62 63 64 65 66 66 67 67 68 69 70 73 163163