Audit criticizes rural deficiencies

Teresa Hinds

Tuesday, June 18, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.

Rural administrators are the Clark County School District's stepchildren and often must settle for leftovers from the Special Student Services Division, according to newly released paragraphs in a special education audit.

District officials released four of the infamous 15 deleted paragraphs on Monday, filling in some of the blanks on pages 31 and 32 of the document. A paragraph released last week is included in the information from these two pages.

A large gap still remains on page 31, and that information, along with the remaining 10 secret paragraphs, is still being reviewed by the district attorney's office.

The paragraphs were deleted when the audit was released recently because of legal concerns. The audit generally criticizes the special education division's management structure and cites a possible $1.2 million in annual savings.

The first paragraph on page 31 introduces the subject of organizational structure in the rural areas, which the auditors said was a special focus of the review.

A 3 1/4-inch gap exists between that paragraph and the next one on page 31, identified as the second newly released paragraph.

That paragraph reads: "Local administrators indicated they rarely received services from the centralized Special Student Services Division. In particular, they cited the Child Find Program and the Occupation/Vocational Education Program."

Administration from the two programs could not be reached for comment late Monday.

The third paragraph reads: "We understand that our research of the rural situation is based on limited observations, but we saw no evidence that service to the rural areas was a priority for the division. One of our ongoing observations of the division was the high number of cellular phones utilized by the district service managers. In contrast, one SEA who services schools hundreds of miles from each other has to pay for her own cellular phone."

The fourth newly released paragraph charges that rural schools are not treated as equally as other schools in the district.

"In addition to our observations, we reviewed documents that indicated rural schools receive less service than do other schools. One administrative memorandum indicates that 'it doesn't appear that teacher personnel in the rural areas will be assigned appropriately.' Subsequently, the division did increase resources to the rural area, but the overwhelming feeling is that this area gets what is left."

The final paragraph on page 32 charges that counseling services are not available to rural services, which could place the district in a tenuous legal position.

"Subsequent review of memorandums and correspondence indicates a comfort level in identifying violations of federal law. One principal indicated in correspondence that 'children in rural areas are not receiving counseling service.' In addition, the principal clearly stated she was concerned that 'failure to address this service could put the district in a position of inviting due process by the parents.' The principal further stated that 'writing counseling as a related service into identified student IEPs and being unable to provide that service, also could prove to be untenable.' We could not find a response to this memo by a division staff member. Furthermore, we learned the Rural Advisory Committee used to meet once every two years, but was disbanded by management in January 1995."

In a statement released by Ray Willis, director of the school district's public information office, he said, "The allegations dealing with services in rural and remote areas and the organizational relationships with schools in remote areas are under scrutiny by Special Student Services."

School district counsel Bill Hoffman said he couldn't speculate on when the 10 remaining missing paragraphs would be released, but said he hoped it would be by the June 26 deadline given to board counsel Johnnie Rawlinson.

The School Board is set to meet at 5:30 p.m. June 26 to discuss the audit with the document's authors, Ed Sontag and David Rostetter.