High rates of absenteeism, , a health crisis, a decrease and a all raise fears that districts are unprepared to respond. These concerns are based on ominous anecdotes we have heard in the course of our work with school leaders and educators in locations such as New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia and Washington, D.C. These colleagues report increasing referrals for evaluation due to behavioral challenges exacerbated by the trauma associated with the pandemic. At the same time, while many students undoubtedly require extra support, many children identified for referrals may not have a disability at all, but rather are struggling due to disruptions to their learning.

Districts must ensure that a lack of appropriate instruction in reading and math and limited English proficiency are not determinant factors in referring children for special education. This is especially important under the “” category. This means states and districts must address instructional loss for all students while reserving highly specialized instruction, services and accommodations for students with documented disabilities.

Issuing blanket referrals for large numbers of children would not only create stress and anxiety for families as they navigate a complex and often contentious process, but also impose onerous procedural requirements on schools and districts for conducting timely evaluations, developing individualized education programs and providing robust specialized instruction. It would also have a tremendous impact on school staffing, funding and academic performance.

While most students with disabilities spend most of their day in general education classrooms, the specialized supports and services they need require specially trained teachers and related providers. Identifying more students as eligible for special education would impose even more significant staffing challenges on schools already struggling to recruit and retain specialists.

If districts were able to find and hire those specialists, their costs would skyrocket. Providing special education and related services can . Historically, around 12.5% of students qualify for special ed, and the additional costs above the standard per-pupil expenditure account for roughly 14% of the average district budget. Increasing the proportion of students in special education to even 25% could mean 28% of a district’s budget allocated to those additional expenditures. 

While the federal can provide some assistance, states and districts will likely face a fiscal cliff when those dollars sunset. Very little ESSER or has gone to support students with disabilities, and there is scant evidence that districts are using other kinds of relief dollars for special education. If there is indeed a flood of special ed referrals, school budgets will be strained even more than they already are, and there will be insufficient funding to support the critical services that underpin students’ individualized educational programs. This scenario would most directly impact children who require significant support.

Lastly, special education eligibility is typically coupled with a distressing and steep and , particularly for Black, Indigenous and other . Absent intentional actions to minimize overidentification, the pandemic might compound poor outcomes for historically marginalized students.

While these predictions are alarming, school leaders and policymakers can prevent this scenario from unfolding. To stem the tide of referrals, we recommend:

• Allocate ESSER stimulus dollars with a laser focus on robust student assessments;
• Ensure that evaluations refer children for special education services only when there is an actual disability, and not when the primary cause of their learning challenges are a .
• Ensure that all ESSER dollars used for instruction, personnel training or direct student services go only toward practices like and . These evidence-based practices facilitate access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities (see, for example, the);
• Double down on early-childhood interventions and expand the time frame beyond the three years when they are typically offered, while recognizing that evaluations can occur at any time. Ideally, elementary schools would temporarily expand their team of early interventionists to provide more intensive and focused support to students identified as being behind in reading and mathematics, and when inappropriate school behavior is first recognized; 
• Expand and enhance training for all educators in inclusive and differentiated practices like Universal Design for Learning, whose evidence-based and flexible approaches enable educators to anticipate learner variability in the general education classroom;
• Implement robust (PBIS) and other evidence-based programs designed to address childhood traumas and underlying causes of inappropriate school behaviors, train staff to effectively reduce and eliminate exclusionary discipline practices, and continuously monitor outcomes for trends that indicate a breakdown of the effectiveness of interventions — especially disproportionate representation of Black boys;
• Invest in efforts to grow the . 

In the best interest of schools and families, we implore states, districts and schools to take action by using ESSER dollars strategically to make decisive plans to avoid skyrocketing referrals for special education and avert a pending crisis.

The analysis is based on CRPE’s year-long review of the districts’ federally mandated spending plans for the relief money, their proposed budgets and their publicly posted recovery spending strategies in 2021-22. The review is limited to publicly available information.

These strategies preview how the nation’s largest school districts are thinking about postpandemic recovery and what the return to a new normal is likely to entail. The release is part of CRPE’s new , which makes its two-plus years of pandemic-era district data tracking and analysis available to the public.

The work builds on CRPE’s new “State of the American Student” report, which pushes states and districts to define measurable goals for pandemic recovery, or risk graduating a generation of students under-equipped for college or careers. The data is a call to action for districts and states to immediately use their federal dollars to ensure every student in the COVID generation makes a full recovery. 

Highlights from the review include: 

Large and urban districts almost universally prioritize facilities improvements, and most plan to invest in broad student and teacher supports 

Eight recovery strategies clearly stood out in district plans for ESSER spending. Almost all districts plan to upgrade facilities (95). Social-emotional supports are next most common (88), followed by technology (85), professional development (84), extended learning opportunities (83), mental health (79), tutoring (79) and internet connectivity and access (78). 

Districts plan to pursue some specific student-centered recovery strategies

A moderate number of districts detail specific strategies to accelerate student learning and well-being. Just two-thirds mention using evidence-based strategies involving data (64) or small-group interventions (60) to catch up students academically. Similarly, about two-thirds (60) are considering investments to strengthen career and postsecondary pathways. Around half of districts plan to re-engage students or work to increase enrollment (52), or invest in new testing systems (35) to better capture academic or social-emotional data.

But investments in staff and parents are less clear

While most districts plan to provide professional development for teachers, far fewer detail specific recruitment strategies like strengthening teacher pipeline programs or university partnerships (37) or providing more mentoring or coaching (26). Parent engagement was among the least frequently cited strategies, with a small portion of districts committing to improving communications with families (20) or providing new leadership opportunities to parents or community stakeholders (15).

District plans vary widely in detail shared and breadth of strategies

The clarity districts offer on their spending plans varies widely. Some began sharing recovery ideas and inviting stakeholders to participate in planning sessions as early as last spring. Others have not yet communicated full plans or invited public feedback.

A few districts, including Buffalo Public Schools in New York and the Montgomery County School District in Maryland, stand out for sharing detailed plans that profile a range of new supports for students, staff and parents. 

will provide an extended school day and school year; small-group instruction; and new programs for students who have special needs or are multilingual and/or Native American. The district will use data to diagnose student needs and hire new intervention staff. It plans to run an engagement program where parent leaders will support other families in their schools and attend monthly school-based management team meetings. The district will offer professional development on STEM, Advanced Placement and anti-racism instruction and plans to send staff to conferences and workshops. Buffalo also offers its staff members self-paced, virtual professional development.

will use data to select students for Saturday school, tutoring and enrichment programs. It is also expanding sports and after-school enrichment programs to re-engage students. Montgomery County plans to train staff in tutoring strategies, student well-being support and how to target assistance to vulnerable students, such as English learners and children with special needs. The district has also designed a professional learning cohort that specifically targets second-year teachers.

Recovery spending needs to happen in earnest, starting now

While the data on students’ remarkable learning loss and mental health needs piles up, the majority of districts have spent just a fraction of stimulus funds to date. This may have made good sense last school year; districts were caught up in a series of disruptions fueled by virus surges and labor shortages, and they needed time to ground their ESSER spending plans in stakeholder input and strategic plans. Fortunately, the start of the 2022-23 school year is proving to be the least disruptive since the pandemic started. Now is the time for districts to make good on their plans, and clearly communicate how they will restore and advance learning environments for students and work environments for adults. 

Our review finds that large and urban districts are committing most clearly to one-time investments in infrastructure but are less precise about recovery strategies to meet the postpandemic needs of students, staff and families. While stimulus funds are a one-time infusion, districts still have the opportunity to make deep, multi-year investments in services and programs that could better support staff and students. Improving learning and working conditions is just as important as facility or technology upgrades — arguably more so, given and enrollment declines of between 2020 and 2022. It is imperative that districts pair long-term investments in their people and systems alongside short-term investments in infrastructure.

It is also worth noting that plans are also just that — plans — until they are put into motion. Districts on the Education Department’s revised ESSER deadlines in order to execute spending strategies. Either way, given that stimulus funds expire as early as 2024, it is imperative that districts begin to thoughtfully spend them down now. And with , districts also need to clearly communicate their spending plans and reach back out to stakeholders for suggestions.