Mid-placer Public Schools Transportation Agency Transportation of Special Needs Children

R1

The Grand Jury recommends that there be a Board policy requiring formal, written contracts with service providers prior to any use of subletted services in transporting special needs children.

R2

The Grand Jury recommends that background checks be completed before children are transported in the sole custody of any individual, internal or external to Mid-Placer. Furthermore, Mid-Placer should ensure that each of its drivers – whether contracted or not – complies with the provisions of the California Education Code which was amended by the Montoya Law.

R3

School districts, Mid-Placer, and the Placer County Office of Education share responsibility in the matters discussed in this report. The Grand Jury recommends that the Placer County Office of Education be the lead agency to ensure that the requirements of special needs children are met. The Board should hold management accountable for transportation special needs children in accordance with State and Federal laws and agency policies.

R4

The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer, the Placer County Office of Education, and the Mid-Placer Board of Directors prioritize transportation of special needs students in accordance with statutes. The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer review its service policy for special needs children to ensure that these children receive the maximum benefit of transportation in relationship to education. The policy should ensure, among other things, that the transportation of every student with special needs by the same driver and on the same vehicle is given top priority as often as possible.

R5

The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer recognize that the term “special needs” implies that those children who meet the criteria must be given priority consideration. The Mid-Placer Board, Placer County Office of Education, and Mid-Placer management should work together to prioritize resources appropriately, bearing in mind their legal and ethical responsibilities for special needs children.

R6

The Grand Jury recommends that the Mid-Placer Board of Directors, the Placer County Office of Education, and Mid-Placer management develop a policy regarding complaints. The Grand Jury recommends that the policy include but not be limited to the following: (a) A method to ensure that complainants promptly receive responsive information regarding the handling and resolution of complaints. (b) A tracking mechanism for each complaint from receipt to resolution. (c) A method for complainants to escalate their concerns to a higher level if satisfactory resolution is not forthcoming. (d) Reports of the nature and resolution of complaints at each Board meeting. (e) A formal mechanism for the Placer County Office of Education to forward complaints to Mid-Placer management.

R7

The Grand Jury recommends that the policy include but not be limited to the following: The Grand Jury recommends that the Mid-Placer Board of Directors and Mid-Placer develop a detailed strategy and timetable to remedy the shortage and turnover rate of drivers. The recruitment, training, and retention of drivers must become a priority. The Grand Jury also recommends that the Placer County Office of Education accept responsibility for both training and providing qualified aides.

R8

The Grand Jury recommends that the policy include but not be limited to the following: (a) The Grand Jury recommends that all vehicles used to transport special needs children are outfitted with working radio equipment and some other type of backup communication equipment such as cellular telephones. For those vehicles that currently do not have adequate equipment, the Grand Jury recommends that the Board of Directors and Mid-Placer budget and obtain required equipment as soon as possible. (b) The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer needs to comply with already established parental notification requirements stated in the Mid-Placer Public Schools Transportation Agency, Special Education Parent Handbook. Furthermore, the Grand Jury recommends that management implement procedures to ensure timely notification of any changes affecting special needs children to all other affected parties, i.e., teachers, aides, drivers, etc. (c) The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer and the Board of Directors develop, implement, and follow procedures to ensure timely and responsive communication during the transportation of special needs children.

R9

The Grand Jury recommends that the policy include but not be limited to the following: The Grand Jury recommends that Mid-Placer ensure that all relevant information, including IEP protocols, is current and available for internal or external drivers. Such information should not breach confidentiality, but should be adequate to ensure the safety of the special needs children.

R10

The Grand Jury recommends that the policy include but not be limited to the following: The Grand Jury recommends that the 2001-2002 Placer County Grand Jury follow-up and monitor Mid-Placer Transportation Agency. Respondents Ackerman Elementary School District Superintendent Alta-Dutch Flat School District Superintendent Board of Directors for the Mid-Placer Public Schools Transportation Agency Colfax Elementary School District Superintendent Loomis Union School District Superintendent Mid-Placer Public Schools Transportation Agency Placer County Office of Education Placer Union High School District Superintendent RESPONSE REQUIRED WITHIN 90 DAYS TO: The Honorable James D. Garbolino Presiding Judge of the Superior Court County of Placer Historic Court House 101 Maple Street Auburn, CA 95603 ADDENDUM TERMINOLOGY: 1. Developmental disability – means a disability which originates before an individual attains age 18, continues, or can be expected to continue, indefinitely, and constitutes a substantial disability for that individual.” This term “shall include mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autism.” It shall “also include disabling conditions found to be closely related to mental retardation or to require treatment similar to that required for individuals with mental retardation, but shall not include other handicapping conditions that are solely physical in nature.” 2. Special Education – In the context of this report, special education, special needs, and children with developmental disabilities are used interchangeably and should be considered as having the same meaning. 3. “d.b.a.” – Doing business as. This is used when a business or an owner uses a fictitious name(s) to operate a business. There are legal requirements to file with the County and/or State and notify the public of these names. 4. IEP - The individualized education program (IEP) is a written statement for each child with a disability which is disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised in accordance with Section 614(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. APPLICABLE CODES: California Chapter 840 statute clearly states, and amends the California Education Code §45125.1 that: (a) “Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), if the employees of any entity that has a contract with a school district, as defined in Section 41302.5, to provide any of the following services may have any contact with pupils, those employees shall submit or have submitted their fingerprints in a manner authorized by the Department of Justice together with a fee determined by the Department of Justice to be sufficient to reimburse the department for its costs incurred in processing the applications: (1) School and classroom janitorial. (2) Schoolsite administrative. (3) Schoolsite grounds and landscape maintenance. (4) Public transportation. (emphasis added) (5) Schoolsite food-related. (b) “This section shall not apply to an entity providing any of the services listed in subdivision (a) to a school district in an emergency or exceptional situation, such as when pupil health or safety is endangered or when repairs are needed to make school facilities safe and habitable. (c) “This section shall not apply to an entity providing any of the services listed in subdivision (1) to a school district when the school district determines that the employees of the entity will have limited contact with pupils, the school district shall consider the totality of the circumstances, including factors such as the length of time the contractors will be on school grounds whether pupils will be in proximity with the site where the contractors will be working, and whether the contracts will be working by themselves or with others. If a school district has made this determination, the school district shall take appropriate steps to protect the safety of any pupils that may come in contact with these employees.” California Vehicle Code §34500 Those requirements include but are not limited to: (1) Applicants should be interview and tested at the closest CHP office, (2) School bus officers and coordinators will conduct an initial interview to ensure minimum requirements for the certificate, (3) medical examination and certificate, (4) fingerprinted by the CHP, (5) FBI fingerprint card, (6) first aid exam as determined by the Emergency Medical Services Authority, et al. California Education Code §14550, Joint Powers Authority “(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local education agency’s obligations pursuant to law may not be avoided through participation in a joint powers authority. (b) A local education agency’s financial obligations to the state may not be avoided through participation in a joint powers authority. (c) A local education agency’s participation in a joint powers authority may not relieve the local education agency of any financial obligation or responsibility to the state unless the state entity undertaking the obligation is a party to the joint powers agreement and expressly agrees in the agreement to undertake the obligation. (d) A local educational entity retains ultimate responsibility over its obligations in case of default by a joint powers authority in which it participates.”