Though less than 1 percent of Bristol’s students require special education services that can’t be delivered in city schools, educating those 78 students is socking taxpayers for nearly $5 million annually.
It costs an average of $62,152 per student to provide the special schooling mandated by the federal government, educators said this week.
When she saw the number, Deputy Superintendent Susan Moreau said, “My jaw dropped.”
“That’s huge,” she said.
It amounts to six times the figure the city spends on the average pupil.
Superintendent Philip Streifer said that most of the students who have to be bused to special schools in other towns are prone to violent behavior and can’t be educated in a normal school environment.
Many of them are “seriously violent,” the superintendent said, and suffer from abandonment or other catastrophic family situations. Some are crack babies, he added.
Basically, Streifer said, the increasing cost of caring for many of the outplaced special education students is a consequence of “parental neglect.”
Streifer said that the problems exist in more than just poor families. It’s more widespread than that, he said, and the overall need for specialized education is growing.
Streifer said that Bristol can’t do much to lower the costs except to try to convince the state to pick up a greater share of the burden.
“This is completely beyond our control,” Streifer said.
The city schools are responsible for paying the tab for outplaced students until the bill reaches more than 4.5 times the average pupil expense in the system – essentially the first $45,000 or so of the cost for each of the 78 outplaced students.
At least 17 of the students covered by the special education outplacement were placed in foster care in Bristol by the state Department of Families and Children. The school system is forced to pick up the tab even though the children hail from somewhere else, officials said.
“These children really should be paid for by the state,” Streifer said.
On the other hand, Bristol children who might require the same costly education are sometimes placed in other towns so it’s not clear whether the DCF placements – which are designed to protect abused minors – have much impact in the big picture.
Tom O’Brien, a Board of Education member, has said he’s convinced DCF is deliberately placing students in Bristol and has called on legislators to take action.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
8 comments:
Now is the time to talk to your state legislators. and those that might be challenging them.
Superintendent, for a supposedly educated man, I am disappointed in you. Some years ago the term "crack baby" was shown to be media hype. While no one argues that crack was good for infants, the impact was greatly overstated in a media feeding frenzy Indeed, it has been argued that what was initially seen as the impact of crack was really the impact of poverty and general neglect.
After the "crack baby" scare died down, there were some later studies which claimed to identify more subtle deficits. The value of these studies is dubious at best. Most used very complex statistical methodologies to tease out subtle relationships. The studies have other problems as well. Most, as is common with academic studies, only reported on statistically significant findings and did not report when they did not find anything. And why not? Academic studies often suffer from a common researcher's bias. Grants are given to find effects and wouldn't you know it, they did. If you don't find what the funders want, grants dry up. So much for objective research.
Another thing to attribute to all the run-down and deteriorated apt houses and cheap rents all over which attract people who have serious social problems and then are stupid enough to have kids.
Steve, i just want to thank you for bringing this sort of information out day after day after day. I don't know how you get so much done every week what with writing so many stories and this blog as well. And you get so much crap too! I haven't written on here before but tonight I feel like I should let you know that some of us appreciate what you do.
Some years ago the term "crack baby" was shown to be media hype.
This is not media hype. It's a title to a medical condition of babies born to mothers addicted to crack cocaine. As a nurse, I've cared for babies born to crack addicted mothers and it's devistating to the baby. It also hinders their development as they grow. Many end up with very serious cognitive disabilities as well as physical disabilities and long term medical issues.
It'so good to read some real discussion rather than nameless name calling.I personally like to learn a lot about many issues , and I do thanks to parts of this blog. Nothing is gained by allowing these nameless hate mongers to use the blogs to satisfy their ego's.
Where are Hamzy, Burns and Nicastro on this issue???
10:11
It was media hype. Just like so many other pet obsessions such as heterosexual AIDS, internet predators, etc.
This is not to say that these things never occur only that their prevalence is grossly overstated by our fear mongering media. Crack babies is another example of that hype. Once the hype was past studies showed that the phenomena, if it existed, was greatly exaggerated and the problems suffered by the so-called crack babies was more a function of poverty and neglect than crack. Again this is not say crack is a harmless substance only that its harm is overstated by a media and academy which feeds off fear and hysteria.
As the superintendent's words show, the fear still plays.
Post a Comment