Parents decry closure of Lagniappe Academies

23rd March 2015   ·   0 Comments

By Kari Dequine Harden
Contributing Writer

Shortly after a scathing report was released by the state alleging numerous violations of the laws protecting children with special needs, officials announced that Lagniappe Academies would be closing at the end of the school year.

The report was based on 24 interviews with current or former teachers, staff, or parents and guardians.

According to the investigation, the Recovery School District (RSD) charter elementary school also took steps to cover up the mishandlings. The school opened in 2010, and serves approximately 180 students in temporary modular buildings located in the Tremé.

In addition to allegations of not providing legally mandated services and outright cheating on tests and forging official forms, the findings include the creation of a “Do Not Call” list of families who the school did not want to return, the refusal to screen students for special services even when families had requested or even brought a diagnosis from a doctor, and the request for a high number of “read aloud” disability accommodations during testing time, even though almost no students received those accommodations.

The report also describes questionable discipline practices and undocumented suspensions.

Lagniappe lists a smaller than average population of students with special needs at less than five percent. The report references eight students with special needs.

The report also alleges that administrators instructed staff to remove furniture from a small classroom used for storage so that it looked like a special education room, told a faculty member that the school only had enough funding for five special ed evaluations, and that the school held back almost one third of its students last year.

The school leadership and board members did not respond directly to requests for comment before the deadline for this story. However, board member Dan Henderson did agree to an interview for a follow-up story.

At a March 13 event hosted by The Lens, board member Dan Henderson said that they take every allegation very seriously, but in the hour-long interview, he raised many questions about the timeline and process that led to the sudden closure. He said that the school had already implemented a corrective action plan to address some of the legal violations that had been brought to the board’s attention last fall.

Henderson said that the new allegations came as a surprise to the board, and that they were given just one week to respond to or refute to the state’s March report.

Published on March 3, the report states that the Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) “has developed significant concern about the competence of the school leadership to manage the basic operations of the school. A preponderance of evidence provided by families and teachers and collected by the Department of Education suggests that the school administration is not able to adequately manage the needs of the students within the building.”

RSD Superintendent Patrick Dobard recommended that the school’s charter not be renewed, and issued the following statement on March 4: “Lagniappe failed to equitably and adequately serve its students and should no longer be allowed the privilege of serving the children of New Orleans.”

On March 5, Kendall Petri, the school’s executive director, stepped down. The report’s allegations focus primarily on two people: Petri, and Alison McCormick, Director of Positive Education.

On March 6, the Board Of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) unanimously voted to not renew Lagniappe’s charter contract.

Considering the allegations, it would seem that the RSD and BESE – the entities that are responsible for the oversight and monitoring—had no choice but to recommend the charter management organization not be allowed to continue operating.

However a four-year long lawsuit filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center against the LDOE, BESE, and State Superintendent John White on behalf of “all present and future New Orleans students with disabilities” provides significant evidence that the special education violations are by no means isolated to Lagniappe.

The Lagniappe scandal comes not long after the state agreed to settle the lawsuit and implement a detailed and extensive federally mandated monitoring agreement. A New Orleans federal judge approved the settlement on Feb. 9.

The lawsuit “claims that the State Defendants allegedly failed to effectively coordinate, monitor and oversee the delivery of special education services across over 60 distinct school districts, or local education agencies [LEA’s], operating in New Orleans. The lawsuit also claims that as a result of these alleged failures, students with disabilities are “subject to discrimination or otherwise excluded from schools; mandatory evaluations for special education eligibility are not conducted; students with disabilities are disciplined without the procedural safeguards required by federal and state law; and students with disabilities are denied free and appropriate public education and related services which they are entitled.”

The ten named plaintiffs in the lawsuit did not seek any money, but rather “to change the State Defendants’ practices with regard to the delivery of special education services for students with disabilities in New Orleans’ schools,” according to the SPLC.

On one hand, the Lagniappe closure gives the state an example of how seriously they take special education laws.

Ensuring that the close to 50, largely autonomous mini-districts in New Orleans are not mistreating, neglecting, or keeping out students with special needs is without doubt a very good thing.

As an unfortunate side-effect of mass-privatization and turning schools into businesses, kids who are difficult to teach, don’t score high on standardized tests, or come to school with additional needs (ironically – the very kids for whom charter schools were originally created) have become financial liabilities in the eyes of some charter operators.

Last week, the RSD, with the Orleans Parish School Board (OPSB) announced the awarding of $1.3 million in grants for students with disabilities.

Increased money, monitoring and accountability in such a fragmented and complicated education landscape is undoubtedly a good thing.

LDOE spokesman Ken Pastor­ick described the monitoring system in place as follows: “BESE-author­ized charter schools re­ceive charter-specific IDEA monitoring in their second year of operation and in the year prior to any extension or renewal decision. The Louisiana Department of Education uses a risk-based approach to identify LEAs for annual monitoring. The Department’s current risk-based indicators are excessive suspensions and academic proficiency. LEAs selected for monitoring receive a desk audit during the academic year. In certain instances, monitoring may be conducted on site at a particular school or district office.”

Regarding the SPLC settlement, an independent monitor has yet to be selected and approved. Pastorick wrote that the requirements of the settlement supplement, but do not “supplant” the current system.

On the other hand, there are some troubling questions surrounding the first RSD charter school to be closed specifically for special education issues.

Such as, why did it take almost 10 years and a lawsuit for the state to hold charter schools accountable to special education laws? And does this mean that other charter schools that have also broken laws and failed to serve kids with special needs (as evidenced in the lawsuit) will soon be closing?

According to data provided by the LDOE regarding IDEA (Individual with Disabilities Education Act) compliance reviews in RSD schools in New Orleans, there were three “findings,” in 2009-2010, three findings in 2010-2011, nine findings in 2011-2012, one finding in 2012-2013, and seven findings during the 2013-2014 school year.

Lagniappe is the only school to face closure as a result of the findings.

Which begs another crucial question: Does closing one school fix the systemic problem and punish the right people?

Immediately following the announcement, devastated parents spoke out in support of Lagniappe.

Board members claimed that they had not been given a chance to respond to the allegations. There was also an affidavit signed by an administrator denying some of the allegations.

Alicia Parker, the parent of a Kindergarten student at Lagniappe, said the allegations were “disheartening and upsetting.” Parker largely attributes the problems to the death of the school’s special education teacher, and the school’s failure to immediately find a replacement. She also questions the veracity of some of the allegations and alluded to disgruntled former employees who had an agenda to hurt the school.

But primarily what Parker focuses on is how positive her experience has been with Lagniappe. She has been elated at how much her son is learning and how well he is thriving.

“As soon as you walk in – you get the warmest feeling,” Parker said of the school environment. “It’s literally like coming home.” Parker describes daily communication with her son Anthony’s teacher, a teacher who she says goes above and beyond for her students. She describes Anthony as a “busy body” – a smart kid who can’t stop moving. Parker said what she did not want to hear was an ADHD diagnoses and recommendation for medication. She said she had a younger brother who was medicated for ADHD and after that “was like a zombie.”

Parker said that instead Anthony’s teacher realized that even if the restless 5-year-old was rolling a pencil in his hand, he was paying attention and learning. “It’s how he concentrates,” she said, and was overjoyed that Anthony’s teacher paid such close attention and was willing to work with him.

Anthony said he loves “recess, counting my numbers,” and his teacher. He describes how magnets work before rattling off the names of all his friends. “That would be sad if my school would be shut,” Anthony said.

Parker is terrified that a OneApp placement – despite Lagniappe students being given priority – will place Anthony in a lower-rated school that sets him back. “I don’t want an RSD school,” she said. “I want an OPSB school.”

Nine of the (higher-performing) OPSB schools still refuse to participate in OneApp, making them not an option for Lagniappe parents at this late date.

And Parker says that she doesn’t think the school had a fair shot at fixing their problems, especially considering their continued academic improvement.

She said she would be open to a new operator.
“ Shutting it down is literally not helping anyone,” Parker said.

Over the past 10 years, other charter schools facing serious allegations have been allowed to conduct their own investigations, implement corrective action plans, or bring in new operators to take over the school so as not to displace the children.

Recently, because of academic failure, the Andrew W. Wilson Charter School community – led by persistent parents – successfully fought to keep their school open and choose a new charter operator.

In almost 10 years, only one RSD charter school has had their charter contract revoked: Abramson Elementary in 2011 (allegations included the attempt to bribe a state official).

Education advocate Karran Harper Royal has long fought for the legal rights and compassionate treatment of children with special needs. She said she will take the state’s allegations against Lagniappe at face value – and the violations, sadly, don’t surprise her.

“There isn’t a single school I’ve worked with in New Orleans that didn’t have [special education law] violations,” she said.

But Harper Royal also doesn’t agree that closure is the best option. The school’s leader – Petri – “did something wrong and now the kids have to pay?” Harper Royal asks. “Closing a school doesn’t fix it. It only makes it harder for children to get their needs met.”

A small operator without a permanent building assignment, Harper Royal calls Lagniappe “the perfect sitting duck,” and a “sacrificial lamb” that allows the state to “show they are tough on special ed violations.”

But the problem is much deeper than one school, she argues. “If they wanted to close schools for violating special education laws, I could find 20.”

Harper Royal points out that 24 schools have been closed since 2009, displacing more than 4,000 students. In some instances, students were moved from one failing school to another failing school, only to then see their new school closed.

When Lagniappe and Miller-McCoy Academy close this year, the count will be at 26 schools and close to 5,000 displaced students.

Despite the unprecedented mass-privatization, parents and educators know that schools are more than just facilities filled by MFP dollars. They become families. The relationship between teachers and students takes incredible time and investment to build.

Research shows that instability – changing schools – has a negative impact on a child’s academic future, particularly for kids who are already struggling.

According to the state, finding a path for Lagniappe families that was similar to the Wilson case was not an option because of “timing.”

According to Pastorick, “Wil­son was non-renewed with sufficient time to run a successful RFA process and ensure that schools had sufficient time to develop and submit high quality applications.”

Pastorick continued in the written statement: “The decision to not grant Lagniappe Academies’ request to continue operating rather than find a new operator was based on a number of factors including the date BESE determined their renewal status, the main round deadline of OneApp, the willingness of the charter board to partner with the RSD in this process, system level capacity to absorb the students and availability of quality seats at relevant grades in nearby schools, and Lagniappe had no long-term facility to take over.

Students and families were able to make the choice of remaining with the new operator at the Wilson facility or had ample time to submit a main round OneApp to choose another school for 2015–2016. That was not an option for Lagniappe families.”

But this reasoning only raises more questions. (The LDOE refused repeated requests for a phone interview in addition to the emailed answers.)

For starters, if the state began investigating the Lagniappe allegations in September 2014, why did could they not meet the Jan. 31 deadline (as in fact required by state law) to notify the CMO that their charter would not be renewed?

According to Pastorick: “The investigation of Lagniappe Academies began in late September 2014 after two former staff members came forward with significant concerns and credible evidence including detailed information about particular students.”

Theoretically, had the state’s own Jan. 31 deadline been met, the Lagniappe parents may have been able to participate in the process of selecting a new operator as the Wilson parents did. In a recent interview, Dobard commended the Wilson parents for their diligence and activism.

But Parker describes a very different experience when Lagniappe parents met with Dobard and Deputy Superintendent Dana Peterson. Parker said that both were aloof and dismissive of their frustrations, and seemed only concerned with getting the parents to fill out their OneApp.

“We need questions answered,” Parker said. “How can they tell me to take my son out of a B school and put him into a failing school?” (Lagniappe’s most recent grade was a C, but was a B before the state changed the grading scale).

According to Harper Royal’s analysis of the most recent School Performance Scores, 56 percent of RSD schools were rated D, F, or T for “transitional.”

In addition, considering that the state is in control of the timeline, and has selected new operators for failing charter schools in much less time, there remains a question of why the more than five months between the March decision not to renew the contract and the start of the 2015-2016 school year, is not sufficient time to work with the Lagniappe parents to find a new operator.

“The state is liable too,” Harper Royal said. “They are just as responsible for creating the atmosphere for what Ms. Petri did by ineffective monitoring and oversight.”

Harper Royal also argues for a “fair and equitable” set policy when it comes to addressing problems in charter schools.

While Parker and other parents acknowledge that the school had problems that needed to be addressed, they have also made it clear that many things were working at the school that emphasizes small class sizes.

In January, the Lagniappe board voted to transfer to the OPSB – a move that has now generated speculation from some that politics may have played a role in how the events – and the public shaming with the releasing of the “confidential” report – unfolded.

Harper Royal said she has concerns that because of how Lagniappe is being handled, parents and teachers at other schools will stay quiet about violations because they fear closure. She said she would rather an environment where parents and faculty feel free to take their concerns to the state in an effort to find resolution without closing an entire school.

Shutting a school and in turn punishing many people who “have no part in the crime sends the wrong message: that we have children and parents bear the brunt of the punishment for the misdeeds of adults in the charter organization,” she said.

At a different school, Harper Royal fought for her own child with special needs who she did not feel was receiving the legally required services. “Never in my wildest dreams did I want the school shut down,” she said.

“Why does anyone think closing a school is accountability? It double-victimizes children with special needs. There is a better way to handle it.”

This article originally published in the March 23, 2015 print edition of The Louisiana Weekly newspaper.