Sign up for Chalkbeat Newark’s free newsletter to keep up with the city’s public school system.
After 12 years of monitoring, Newark Public Schools is now in compliance with federal and state timelines for identifying and evaluating students with disabilities and will no longer be required to provide semi-annual reports showing data in reaching mandated goals.
The district has shown improvements in raising its compliance rate for meeting with parents who request a special education evaluation, evaluating eligible students, and implementing special education services, according to a state monitor. The progress is a result of a 2012 class action settlement agreement in M.A. v. Newark Public Schools, et al., a federal lawsuit that set a 95% compliance goal for the district to raise its historically low rates in evaluating students and delivering services on time.
The progress achieved by the district is a victory for Newark’s parents and children but the state’s monitoring focused solely on complying with federal and state timelines, said Elizabeth Athos, senior educational equity attorney at Education Law Center.
“The case doesn’t necessarily address the quality of the services that kids are getting,” said Athos, who along with a team of attorneys spent a decade in court arguing a lawsuit that resulted in the state’s monitoring under the settlement agreement.
The 2012 settlement agreement stemmed from a 2001 lawsuit filed by a group of six parents represented by the Education Law Center and Gibbons P.C. The case alleged that Newark was violating its “Child Find” duties, a mandate under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act that requires all school districts to identify, locate, and evaluate children with disabilities, regardless of the severity of their disabilities.
Newark Public Schools has seen a dramatic increase in the number of students with disabilities in recent years. This school year, roughly 7,000 students with disabilities are enrolled in district schools and make up less than a quarter of the district’s nearly 40,000 students. This fall, another 11,000 students are English language learners, pointing to the district’s growing need to provide additional support and resources for vulnerable students.
During the first week of school this month, some students with disabilities missed class due to enrollment issues. In previous years, parents of students with disabilities have had trouble securing school services such as transportation and other services required under their child’s Individualized Education Program. The COVID-19 pandemic also affected students with disabilities who were some of the hardest hit by learning disruptions with some requiring makeup services they lost during that time.
Since the monitoring process began in July 2012, the district has been required to issue reports every six months to verify its compliance with state and federal timelines, as part of the settlement agreement approved by the federal district court on Jan. 27, 2012. The agreement tasked the district with achieving 95% compliance with the following two requirements:
- Within 20 days of a request for a special education evaluation, the district must meet with parents to determine if a student is eligible for an evaluation, and, if so, obtain parental consent for evaluation; and
- Within 90 days of parental consent, the district must conduct a special education evaluation and implement special education and related services for eligible students.
Under state law, the district has to continue to follow those requirements despite the end of the compliance monitoring.
The district started the monitoring process with a 90-day compliance rate of 32% and is now achieving compliance rates above the 95% goal, according to the Education Law Center. The district’s 20-day compliance rate has also risen since July 2012, when it started at 84%. The rate has been consistently at 98% or higher since February 2021, the Education Law Center said.
“While we are pleased with the progress that has been achieved, going forward, the district must broaden its focus to ensuring the quality of its decision-making during the child find and evaluation process,” said class co-counsel Lawrence S. Lustberg, of the Gibbons law firm. “We will not demand that NPS continue its extensive reporting to us, but we intend to watch closely during the next year, to make sure there are no signs of backsliding.”
Diane Janson, the designated special education compliance monitor, and Kim Murray, director of the New Jersey Department of Education’s Office of Special Education, assured Athos and the plaintiffs in the case that the district and Superintendent Roger León had “the support and structure in place to sustain the progress it has made,” according to a press release issued by the Education Law Center.
The district will continue internal monitoring and would reach out to Janson for assistance as “it works to continue improving its special education program,” the press release said.
Newark has also worked to improve its special education program after citations from the New Jersey Department of Education. In 2019, the state cited the district for failing to meet key mandates related to education plans for students with disabilities. In 2022, the state department also found the district had problems with reporting in education plans, notifying parents of meetings, and missing meetings with parents and students with disabilities as part of responsibilities mandated under IDEA. The state ordered the district to take corrective action by November 2022.
Jessie Gómez is a reporter for Chalkbeat Newark, covering public education in the city. Contact Jessie at jgomez@chalkbeat.org.
