The Texas Education Agency has denied allegations in a letter sent to the agency by the U.S. Department of Education in October that it penalized school districts with more than 8.5 percent of students enrolled in special education programs. The TEA responded that the measurement was an indicator, not a requirement, and that failure to comply did not result in punitive measures.

“Allegations that TEA issued fines, conducted on-site monitoring visits, required the hiring of consultants, et cetera, when districts provided special education services to more than 8.5 percent of their students are entirely false,” wrote Penny Schwinn, TEA deputy commissioner of academics.

In Spring and Klein ISDs, enrollment in special education programs has decreased from more than 10 percent to about 8 percent from 2004-16. Both districts said the decrease was a result of improvements in intervention programs rather than an effort to lower the number to meet a state requirement.

“The only consequence for not meeting the 8.5 percent [marker] would have been writing a corrective action plan,” said Margaret Sherwood, SISD executive director of special education.

The percentage of students receiving special education services at SISD has dropped from 11 percent to 8 percent since 2004, Sherwood said.

The percentage of students who receive special education services at KISD also has decreased from a little over 10 percent to 8 percent from 2004-16.

“As the district improved in providing intervention processes, some students made significant gains in academic knowledge as well as in positive social behaviors,” said Mary Rosenberg, KISD executive director of student support services. “As the process evolved, more students who received early intervention were able to access and progress in the general education curriculum without the need of specialized instruction through special education.”

The TEA stated in a Nov. 2 letter to federal officials that statewide enrollment in special education programs had begun to drop before 2004—from 12.3 percent in 2000 to 11.6 percent in 2003—and actually increased by 1.2 percent from 2015-16.

The 8.5 percent mark is an indicator of a performance range and is one of four ranges used as a data point in collecting information about a district’s special education programs, not a target, Schwinn wrote. The 15.1-percent mark is the point at which intervention could take place in the form of the TEA recommending further data analysis or an improvement plan for the district, she wrote.

“We’ve never punished districts for falling into the representation category above 8.5 percent,” TEA Information Specialist Lauren Callahan said.