1. 1
The Comprehensive Synthesis of the
Importance of Special Education Budgeting
Dominica R. Felici Skal
August 17, 2015

2. 2
As I prepare this comprehensive report, I realize that as a future school leader,
I will have a financial responsibility in the following areas of concern: budget
development and implementation, IDEA and other funding for special education,
compliance monitoring, special education plan development, parent engagement, extended
school year and working in collaboration with school board members as well as other
administrators. Below you will find a reflection of these responsibilities as a future
school leader and their relation to the school budget.
•Budget Development and Implementation
As a future special education administrator, I will be required to both develop and
implement a special education budget. I will begin by assessing the previous year’s special
education budget in order to locate improvement areas. ‘How can our students to be
provided the biggest bang for their buck?’ (Sorenson, R.D. & Goldsmith, L.M., 2013). In
doing so, I will begin by reviewing the needs of the current students with IEPs. Then I will
research the rate of growth for the student versus the expense for the service. ‘The
service business of school requires self-discipline, trustworthiness, transparency, integrity
and collaboration to be combined in an integrated budget and academic action plan’
(Sorenson, R.D. & Goldsmith, L.M., 2013, p.30). The budget cycle can be visualized as a
never-ending circle of setting goals, reviewing goals and cost, research, proposals of
options, reviewing those options and voting on the best options for the needs of our

3. 3
students. The budget continues to cycle as improvements will always be needed through
assessments and goal setting.
•IDEA and other sources of funding for special education
‘Before 1975, students with disabilities were discriminated against for these
individuals were not afforded a free and appropriate education due to their disability. In
1954, 21 years prior to 1975, Brown vs. the Board of Education set the stage for
eliminating discrimination in public schools by abandoning segregation for it is the right of
every individual to be afforded an equal, free and appropriate education (FAPE). Although
Brown vs. the Board of Education was not a special education case, this supreme court
decision made it possible for early 1970’s court cases such as: PARC (Pennsylvania
Association for Retarded Children) vs. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Mills vs. The
District of Columbia to entitle exceptional children a free and appropriate education and
therefore, due process of law. As debated on our discussion board during Week 8, my
opinion remains that Pennsylvania is more progressive in special education than New Jersey
due to the PARC case. Although New Jersey may have more specialized educational
facilities close in proximity, Pennsylvania’s special education standards and laws appear to
be more detailed and demanding. Due to these court decisions which dealt with
discrimination, Congress enacted PL 94-142, known as Public Law 94-142, The Education
for all Handicapped Children Act. Eight years prior to IDEA, The Individuals with

4. 4
Disabilities Education Act was enacted, Rowley vs. the Henderick Hudson BOE decision
defined appropriate in FAPE without the school district’s legal obligation to afford the
maximum education for each student.’ (Yell, M., Katsiyannis, A., Hazelkorn, M., 2007) Why
mention these historical cases and what do they have do with the present day budget? As
a taxpayer versus a parent with a special needs child, each party has a diverse
perspective. During Week 7’s discussion board, Melissa and I were sharing personal
perspectives for a reason. The point being that if President John F. Kennedy did not lead
the reigns for both Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and PL 94-142 due to
his personal interest and compassion for his disabled sister, Congress and Gerald Ford
would not had signed either policy to law. These laws set the stage for a Free and
Appropriate Education (FAPE), Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Least
Restrictive Environment (LRE), due process and parent procedural safeguards. Yet how
and why did it take so long to renew PL 94-142 to IDEA during the Clinton administration
and now IDEIA during the Obama administration? I recall the Reagan administration’s
involvement with “The War on Drugs” and Bush with “No Child Left Behind” (NCLB). Still
today, I believe that the Rowley case continues to muddy the waters of educational
leaders’ perspectives. Rowley’s decision claimed that school districts have to provide an
appropriate education. However, this supreme court decision decided that school districts
are not bound to providing “the maximum or best” educational opportunity for their

5. 5
students. With that thought in mind, doesn’t it sound hypocritical when all school districts
claim their mission is provide an education that allows students to reach their full
potential? At the same time, I wonder if FAPE needs be redefined for the present time,
in order to align with Common Core Standards and assessments intended for high school
graduation such as: PARCC? More importantly, what do school districts need to change to
financially prepare themselves for FAPE of 2015?
•Compliance Monitoring, Extended School Year (ESY) & Parent Engagement
Special education funding results from a combination of local, state and federal
funds and the question becomes during an audit or compliance monitoring are these funds
being appropriately utilized according to the law? ‘The Individuals with Disabilities
Education law distributes federal funds to school districts in order to assist public schools
to abide by this law. IDEA is a law with five sections: A, B, C, D & E. Part A of IDEA
defines the law and its purpose. Section B of IDEA deals with state eligibility for federal
funds for students with disabilities ages 3-21. In order to comply with Part B of IDEA,
six main principles must be in compliance: FAPE, LRE, due process, IEP, entitlement to
evaluation upon parental consent and child/parent input taken into account in the
educational process. Part C of IDEA deals with LEA eligibility for federal funds for
children ages birth-2 years of age. In order to comply with Part C of IDEA, four main
principles must be in compliance: family entitlement of appropriate, timely and

6. 6
multidisciplinary identification and intervention services, individualized family service plan
(IFSP), parental right to participate and consent before initiation of intervention services
and due process. Parts D and E of IDEA deal with quality of special education, special
education professional development and recruitment/retainment of special education
teachers and staff. (Wright, W.D. & Wright P.D., 2013) I mention IDEA under compliance
monitoring because this is why each state requires special education enrollment
submissions in some form to the federal government. Second, each state has built
compliance laws for their state. For example, as mentioned in the PATTAN Special
Education Plan training video, Pennsylvania schools are compliant or following the law when
a speech and language teacher has 65 or fewer caseloads with a maximum of five students
per session. However, New Jersey does not have a legal limit of caseloads for the
speech/language teacher. The New Jersey Special Education Programs in all public school
districts must be compliant with twenty indicators. After reviewing New Jersey’s Self
Assessment Special Education Monitoring Manual, I felt that New Jersey is moving toward
a system that combines both cyclical and focused compliance monitoring. In fact, New
Jersey is offering school districts money through a School Improvement Grant (SIG) to
hire Turnaround Principals or partake in a variety of transformation models. The New
Jersey Compliance Monitoring System reminded me of the continuous improvement cycle
as in NJ’s Student Growth Objectives (SGO’s) similar to PA’s Student Learning Objectives

7. 7
(SLO’s). Extended School Year (ESY) as outlined in IDEA and by the New Jersey
Department of Education allow a collaborative decision at the IEP meeting between the
school district and parents if these extra services are necessary during the summer
months due to a variety of indicators involving rate and recovery of regression. During
IEP meetings, I have witnessed discussions of student x’s ability to retain information
after the weekend and school vacations, in order to determine if ESY would benefit
student x. Parent engagement is not only encouraged during IEP meetings but also
required by law. IDEA specifies the right to parent involvement throughout the law.
Furthermore, school districts must have a written parent engagement policy, which is
required by law if the school district accepts Title I funding. The New Jersey Special
Education Code requires school districts to have parent advisory groups. In my opinion,
allowing parents to form a community avoids due process because a listening ear is always
available. From a business perspective, it is more advantageous to know why one has an
unhappy customer than to avoid the complaints. Due to differences in state compliance,
the process in the development of Special Education Planning also differs in legality
between states.
•Special Education Plan Development & Collaboration with Administration/School Board
New Jersey and Pennsylvania differ in special education plan development as
mentioned through the discussion board with my research and participation in NJSmart

8. 8
training for special education submission. I do realize that although the PARC case may
have provided the state of Pennsylvania with more descriptive state compliance laws, as a
future special education administrator, this detailed information is needed for budget
planning regardless of state compliance requirements. ‘As I shared on the discussion
board, I would like to utilize a format similar to the Lawrence School District in Trenton,
New Jersey because it followed a researcher’s process’ (Servillo, E, 2015). This example
located in Appendix A also signifies the importance and necessity of working with other
school administrators and board members, as well as the collaboration of team
development, where the big picture is identified. Although the big picture for each school
district may have a common theme, it is unique for each school district due to differences
of wants and needs for each school population and community.
To conclude, the past ten weeks assisted me in visualizing all of the themes discussed
as in a Wordle and their connection to the budget cycle. It is my hope to be given the
opportunity to become a Special Education Supervisor or Turnaround Principal, the
administration and organization of the budget and its relation to the school’s mission will
determine the heart of the agenda. “I Expect Progress” in not only my expectation in
every IEP but in every student served either in my classroom or under my future
leadership.

9. 9
References
Yell, M., Katsiyannis, A. & Hazelkorn, M., (2007). Reflections on the 25th
anniversary of
the U.S. supreme court’s decision.
Servillo, E. (2015, August 14). Special education strategic planning sessions 1-3.
Retrieved from: http://ltps.org/admin.cfm?subpage=7517
Sorenson, R.D. & Goldsmith, L.M., The principal’s guide to school budgeting. Corwin: 2013.
Wright, W.D. & Wright, P.D., Wrightlaw: Special education law. Harbor House Law Press:
2013.

10. 10
Appendix A
A Research Process Format of Special Education Planning
I. Mission Statement
II. Development of a Vision for "each" Team (Blue, Yellow, Red Teams-Time Magazine that reads “Special
Services that Succeeds”. The participants were asked to "envision" what was written in Time Magazine that
warranted such high recognition.
Key Question: In our current SPED Services Program already in place, what programs, services, curriculum,
student outcomes, best practices facilities would you expect to see in your school that are succeeding? (Think
the “Big Picture” for the individual school district)
III. Team Collaboration: After all teams received their group's visions, the next session began with a
synthesis of the common themes. The common themes were: Inclusion, Early Intervention, Smaller Class
Sizes, Full Child Study Teams, Professional Development, Social Skills Development, Students Transition to
High School and Adulthood, Community Outreach, PM Tutoring, Facilities-accessibility, capacity
IV: Emerge Themes with Goals:
1. Equal Access for All Children (Inclusion Programs-Equitable Service)
2. Community Outreach & Readiness
3. Professional Development
V. Goal Statement and Objective: In teams, one goal statement was written w objectives. So basically the
overall goal and objectives in how to obtain the goal is shown in the example below:
Goal Area: Community Outreach and Readiness
Goal Statement: Establish an inclusive community, based on partnerships and alliances, which will foster
student success in the global world.
Objective 1: Survey the community to find interest and need for knowledge of our students
Objective 2: Create community workshops to develop an inclusive community
Objective 3: Increase community-based instructional experiences to build linkages and increase utilization of
resources.
Recommended Potential Actions: (Action Plan)
1. Publish business partners on websites
2. Ongoing opportunities (committee discussions) between parents, CST, and board to discuss strategic goals
and objectives
3. Parent/community-wide school support for business partners
VI. Strengths, Challenges and Visions
Strengths vs. Challenges T Chart