Program Transfer in California

Question

San Luis Obispo County SELPA is considering a major program transfer from COE operation to district operation. My impression is that this is a trend across the state. Is that true? How many of you have had program transfers from COE to districts in the last five or so years? Are you seeing related services and medically fragile transfer as well?

Responses

1. We had a program transfer from the COE to 4 small districts in 2004. All special ed. services including related and services for medically fragile transferred at that time.

2. In San Diego County, the local districts have always operated programs for SH students.

3. In my many travels, I would suggest that program transfer from COE to district is occurring at an increasing rate, but related services and, particularly, medically fragile are the least common programs being transferred.

4. We've had quite a number since I started here in 2001. However, rarely are they for the more severe students. Typically it's been DIS, preschool and SDCs for higher functioning kids. Before 2003, our COE operated many of the non-severe classes.

5. We did that several years ago. Yes, severely disabled and medically fragile transferred to us. We cover the DIS and nursing needs. They are ours completely - no county participation in programs.

6. We have had 3 program transfers in the past 2 years. Districts believe they can operate at lower costs. Some districts have taken back the SH programs.

7. I was involved with such a transfer- from Los Angeles County Programs to a small district. I was the principal of the programs and went to the district to assist with the transfer. We had a 3 year plan…yr 1- LSS, APE and transportation; yr 2- all the SH, VI, Adult Transition, ED and yr 3- OH. The biggest hurdle was the district aides (all 3 ½ hours) wanting to be full time aides in the ‘former county classes’. Most of the teachers and aides came over to the district though. It took the site principals couple of years to really ‘embrace’ the new staff and students and adapt to evaluating the various classes/staff.

8. My largest district has begun to study the issue and may request a transfer from the COE within the next year.

9. We were facing this last year, but opted to stick with our COE - run programs. There were several SELPA Directors who were willing to help me if needed - they will probably respond to you. We are having a FCMAT study of our budget and program operations in the fall - so they may recommend transfers for some of the COE programs, although our cost per student is relatively low.

10. We had a major transfer of programs in 2002 but the COE still provides many services for students including severe programs, DHH, VI and infant services. Our larger districts also have some of these same services while the smaller ones utilize the services of both the COE and larger districts through ‘regional programs”.

11. We have experienced this trend over the past few years in our SELPA as we went from an off-the-top allocation model for intensive students to 100% billback. Most districts have taken back all of their moderate/severe students except for students with significant autism, orthopedically impairments, or those with significant multiple disabilities. Additionally, many of our districts have taken back preschool programs (both intensive & non-intensive) and many others are looking at that in the future. This year, I assigned one of my program specialists to work with each district taking back programs to ensure that professional development activities are well-planned and to provide assistance with program development. They will keep that assignment for the first year of take-back to provide ongoing consultation and support. It had not been done that way in the past and after seeing those results I decided that we really needed to do more to support these transfers. It sounds like you've got some major transfers happening all at once. Good luck!

12. For us the program transfers started when we changed our funding model (2005) to fee for service for county office programs and allocation by ADA out to districts of just about all of the money, except for an extraordinary cost pool. Since the first year, the program transfers slowed down dramatically, but the referrals are not as plentiful, and the districts are providing preschool services and keeping the students. What remains in the county are students with severe mental retardation accompanied by behavioral problems, and emotionally disturbed children. Related services have transferred also, but medically fragile (for the most part) have remained with the county.

13. Yes, it's a trend, and we have done it too, including for medically fragile.

14. I think you will find a trend that during fiscally challenging times people think they can do a better (less expensive) in the district than the COE can do.

15. I worked in two SELPAs that transferred all of their programs from the county to local district operation within the last 9 years. I have a lot of knowledge on this subject and would be happy to chat with you about it when we see each other in July. The trend started after AB 602 passed and changed the funding model. It used to be cost effective to allow the county office to run these programs but now, when a district reaches a certain size, it is more cost effective for them to operate their own programs or join with their neighbors to run a regional program.

16. Yes our districts are looking to serve more of their students. I have 7 elementary districts, two unified and one high school. Most of the elementary districts are small. They have taken back preschool programs, ED classes, moderate severe classes. They have always done their own LSH, and most have their own APE, but we are seeing more districts now hiring their own OT. The initial driving force was a sense of these are our students, and we can do a better or equal job. Parents have liked having programs provided by the district. But also as the cost of the county program has increased, we are beginning to see a financial incentive as well.

17. We had a several preschool transfers two years ago—that has been it. No on the medical fragile—The larger Districts are realizing the high cost impact—the smaller districts are realizing the limitation to access to services if District LEA operated—Districts indicated they would keep the costs down—then in the second year hit smaller districts with really high fee for service costs—Same thing happened with the transfer of transportation many many years ago—Do they never learn? No

18. Yes – a lot of this in Riverside County SELPA – I can share experiences if you want to give me a call –

19. We have not had that experience. Would you mind sending me your findings? Also what classes did you transfer and what did you keep?

20. We have had no transfer of programs…we have 46 districts and over 90,000 reg ed student base.

21. One of the districts took back the medically fragile students several years ago. The other district is anticipating giving notice next week for a take-back.

22. Margaret Cherene successfully did this as did Don Crane in Antelope Valley SELPA. Good luck