The work does not fit
in a workshop.
Most special education consulting arrives as a workshop and leaves as a binder. We work the way the job actually works, over a year, inside the buildings, on the specific problems a district already knows it has.
The question we ask first.
Is the district prepared to change something as a result of this work?
This is not a formality. A district that wants an outside voice to confirm a decision already made does not need us, and the engagement will not produce anything worth the cost. We would rather say so in the first conversation than in the final report. When the answer is yes, the work has somewhere to land, and that is when this is worth doing.
Four phases, assembled to the district.
No district buys all four the same way. The phases are components, not a package, and what a partnership includes depends on what the readiness review finds.
Readiness review
A structured look at where the program actually stands. Staffing patterns, service delivery, caseload and workload distribution, and the gap between what the district believes is happening and what the data shows. The review stands alone, and it credits toward a partnership if the work continues.
On-site intensive
Days in the buildings with the people doing the work. Program leadership, provider teams, and building administrators, working on the specific problems the readiness review surfaced rather than a general professional development agenda.
Coaching across the year
Recurring work with the director and the leadership team. The problems that matter in special education do not resolve in a single visit, and the ones that do resolve tend to return without someone holding the thread.
Review and sustainability roadmap
What changed, what did not, and what the district needs in order to carry the work without us. A partnership that leaves a district dependent has failed, regardless of what the survey data says.
Systems work and clinical work are not the same work.
Districts usually need both, and they rarely arrive together. Engagements draw on one track or both, depending on where the program actually needs help.
Systems and leadership
For directors, superintendents, and district leaders carrying the organizational side of special education. Program design, staffing and budget analysis, workload distribution, and the leadership work of making inclusion a system rather than an initiative.
- Special education program design and restructuring
- Budget, staffing, and resource allocation analysis
- Student services leadership coaching
- Inclusive school systems assessment
- Workforce data and staffing evidence
Clinical and curriculum
For schools and districts building clinical programs, implementing the Trust Framework, or working through AAC, MTSS, and inclusive practice. The clinical depth that makes a framework defensible and a program workable.
- Trust Framework professional development and implementation
- AAC consultation and team training
- MTSS design and inclusive practices
- IEP and clinical program development
- Social language curriculum coaching, K to 12
Districts rarely lack the money. They lack the line.
In our experience the obstacle is almost never budget. It is that the director does not know which fund this comes out of. These are the sources districts have used.
Allowability depends on scope. Federal funds carry requirements about what the work must address and how it must be documented, and the answer differs by state and by grant. We will tell you what we know about how other districts have funded this. Your business office and state agency make the determination.
Start with a conversation.
Tell us what the program is dealing with. If we are not the right people for it, we will say so, and we will usually know who is.
Start the conversationOr book a thirty minute call directly.