Office of Performance Evaluations
Idaho School for the Deaf and the Blind
Released October 2005
Report 05-03
Full report (PDF)
The executive summary of the report is provided below. The full report
with exhibits is available in
PDF (see above), and a limited
number of printed copies are available from the Office of Performance Evaluations
(OPE). Specific questions about the report should be directed to OPE.
Any other questions need to be directed to the State
Board of Education or the Idaho
School for the Deaf and the Blind.
Executive Summary
The Idaho School for the Deaf and the Blind (ISDB) is at a turning point. Policymakers will need to
consider the school’s future direction because changes in recent decades have resulted in declining
enrollment, rising costs per student, increased demand for regional services, and underutilized campus
facilities. Policymakers and ISDB officials have essentially two options:
- Maintain the current system of providing services, and implement our recommendations
- Deliver services through a new model
As discussed in the last chapter of this report, new models for service delivery could include
preserving ISDB as a school for either day students or multi-disability students; providing outreach
services only; or relocating the school to an urban area where students could take advantage of a wider
variety of educational opportunities and services.
Other states have faced similar challenges, and throughout this report we highlight how some of them
have addressed those challenges. Any significant change to ISDB’s service delivery should be accompanied
by detailed analyses of how well students will be served, fiscal tradeoffs, facility use, and logistical
constraints.
Background
The Idaho School for the Deaf and the Blind (ISDB) is a state-funded and operated agency serving
Idaho’s sensory-impaired students. Idaho’s State Board of Education serves as ISDB’s board of trustees.
The campus is located in Gooding, Idaho, and is situated on acreage donated in 1909 by former Governor
Frank Gooding. According to the warranty deed, if the land is not used for a state school for sensory-impaired
students, or for other state uses, it is to revert back to Governor Gooding’s heirs.
ISDB provides services to residential students who stay overnight on campus, day students who attend
school and are bused to and from the school daily, and to students and families in their home school
districts through regional outreach consultants. Although not required by federal law, most states operate
a school for the deaf and/or the blind. Idaho is one of nine states that serve the two populations at a
single school.
Responsibilities Need Clarification
In recent decades, numerous changes have been made in federal laws regarding the education of
sensory-impaired students. However, Idaho statutes have not been amended to keep pace with these
changes or the expansion of ISDB’s outreach services. Therefore, amendment of state statutes and/or
ISDB practices is needed to achieve agreement between practice and law.
ISDB Campus Enrollment Is Declining
As of September 2005, there were 75 students enrolled in ISDB’s campus programs. Enrollment at ISDB’s
campus has declined in nine of the past ten years, by an average of six students per year (exhibit A). A
continued decline at this rate would decrease ISDB’s campus enrollment to approximately 60 students within
three years. ISDB currently uses less than one-half of its facilities due to this decline in students.
Sustainable enrollment is critical to the future of the school; however, school officials have not
incorporated enrollment projections into their short- or long-term strategic planning efforts.
State and national indicators show a trend of declining enrollment in schools for the deaf and/or the
blind, and consequently, some states have closed their schools. The trend is due in part to an increase
of students and children receiving services in their local school districts or in their homes. ISDB serves
about 90 percent of its students and children through outreach programs.
Expenditures Have Kept Pace with Inflation, but Costs Per Student Are Rising as Enrollment Declines
ISDB’s annual state general fund appropriation accounts for over 95 percent of its total budget, which is
$8.16 million in the current fiscal year. Over the past ten years, ISDB revenues and expenditures have kept
pace with inflation. However, ISDB’s continued enrollment decline has resulted in a rising cost per student.
We estimated ISDB spent about $82,000 for each residential (overnight) student and about $59,000 for each day
student during the 2004–05 school year. If the decline in enrollment continues at the current pace, the cost
per residential student could be $100,000 within two years.
Outreach Services Have Expanded
ISDB provides various outreach services to school districts and families through seven regional offices
around the state. This program served an average of 660 students and children during the 2004–05 school
year, a 25 percent increase over the past ten years. Although each student or child has an associated case
on file that is coded by type and amount of work required, numbers reported to the Legislature treat all
cases equally and do not reflect actual workload. Regular assessment of workload would allow ISDB to provide
more useful information to policymakers (the State Board of Education and the Legislature).
One of ISDB’s more recent outreach efforts is a partnership with the Meridian School District to provide
auditory-oral communication instruction to pre-school, kindergarten, and first grade students from Meridian
and surrounding districts. ISDB also provides an instructor for a pre-school total communication class that
has been functioning for many years. During the 2004–05 school year, these programs served 21 students who
have cochlear implants. Cochlear implants are surgically implanted devices that allow individuals to detect
sound. Implants are approved for some children as young as 12 months, and successful use of these devices
depends greatly on the availability and use of appropriate habilitative services.
ISDB currently provides three instructors plus some classroom aides for these programs, and the district
provides classroom space. However, this arrangement, including staff responsibilities, has never been
formalized in writing, leaving both parties vulnerable to legal and/or fiscal disputes.
Satisfaction with ISDB Services Is High
Parent and school district survey responses reported high satisfaction with ISDB campus and outreach
services. In addition, many school districts reported they were poorly prepared to provide services to
sensory-impaired students without the assistance of ISDB. Districts reported a declining demand for
residential services, but increasing use of, and desire for regional outreach services. Dissatisfaction
with ISDB services comes primarily from parents of children who have cochlear implants and feel more
auditory-oral services are needed.
Other States Have Faced Similar Challenges
In recent years, other states’ schools for sensory-impaired students have experienced enrollment
declines and have adapted and incorporated different approaches to serving students. Michigan, Nebraska,
North Carolina, and Wyoming have closed residential schools and focused resources on regional outreach
efforts. Some states have entered into partnerships with local school districts to share costs, while
others have incorporated new technologies to better serve their students.
In the final chapter of this report, we highlight how ISDB is at a turning point and policymakers can
choose essentially one of two options for the school. One option is to maintain the current model of
service delivery at the same location and implement our recommendations. The second option is for
policymakers to choose a different model of service delivery, possibly at a new location, and implement
relevant OPE recommendations. Any new model considered should be accompanied by detailed analyses of how
well students will be served, fiscal tradeoffs, facility use, and logistical constraints.
Recommendations
Should policymakers decide to continue with the current service delivery model, we offer nine
recommendations to improve services to students and management of ISDB. Some of these recommendations
will also be applicable if policymakers choose a new option for ISDB. The recommendations are listed by
chapter where additional details are discussed.
Chapter 2
2.1: To ensure ISDB is operating according to legislative intent, and
to provide accountability for ISDB services and functions, the Legislature
should clarify the following areas of ISDB’s authorizing statutes:
- Responsibilities
- Populations to serve and eligibility requirements
- Service models
- Compliance with federal requirements
2.2: To further clarify ISDB’s responsibilities for providing education to sensory-impaired students,
ISDB and cooperating agencies should revise their interagency agreements according to federal law and any
changes in state statute.
2.3: To help ensure all students with sensory impairments in Idaho are provided a free and appropriate
public education, the State Board of Education should ensure that school districts follow statutory
requirements to annually report the number of sensory-impaired students in their districts to ISDB.
Chapter 3
3.1: To assist policymakers in making future decisions about the operation of the Gooding campus,
ISDB should develop the following processes:
Establish an ongoing process for tracking campus enrollment
Use enrollment trend data and other available information to regularly project future enrollment
Report enrollment trends and projections to the State Board of Education and the Legislature on an annual
basis
3.2: To improve economic efficiency, ISDB should work with the State Board of Education to develop a plan
that identifies opportunities to address rising costs per student and share the results of these efforts with
the Legislature. For example, a plan should address appropriate staffing levels for administration,
instruction, maintenance, support, student-teacher ratios, number of cottages in operation, and use of the
facilities for other purposes.
Chapter 4
4.1: To improve ISDB staff’s ability to educate parents on communication options for their children,
ISDB should take steps to ensure its staff understand the various options and can effectively communicate this
information to parents.
4.2: To avoid potential legal and financial disputes, ISDB should formalize its arrangement of providing
instructors to teach classes within the Meridian School District in an interagency agreement pursuant to Idaho
Code § 67-2332.
4.3: To better understand resource demands, ISDB should separately measure caseload and workload and
report this information to legislative committees.
Chapter 5
5.1: To clarify ISDB’s intent to provide auditory-oral training to students with cochlear implants and
to address parent dissatisfaction, the Idaho State Board of Education should develop policies and procedures
for the school that address program vision and administration, teacher qualifications and training, and
curriculum development. Input from parents and ISDB staff should be sought during policy development.
Fiscal Impact and Implementation Timeframe of Recommendations
The costs of implementing recommendations 2.1–3.1 and 4.1–4.3 should be minimal or none because these are
typical functions of the Legislature, the State Board of Education, and ISDB. Implementation should be
complete by July 1, 2006.
The costs of implementing recommendation 3.2 should be minimal because this process is already underway
by the State Board of Education. Results of this recommendation should be shared with the Legislature
during the 2006 legislative session and later as more analyses are completed.
The costs of implementing recommendation 5.1 could vary depending on the extent to which the State Board
of Education solicits information from parents, ISDB staff, and other experts. Implementation should be in
place prior to the start of the 2006–07 school year.
Responses to the Evaluation
We requested and received written response to this report from the Office of the Governor and the State
Board of Education. Those responses are included at the end of this report along with our comments.
Acknowledgments
We appreciate the cooperation and assistance we received from the Idaho School for the Deaf and the
Blind and the State Board of Education in conducting this study. We also appreciate the input we received
from numerous parents, Dr. Jill Beck of Southwest Idaho Ears, Nose & Throat, and the following entities:
- Legislative Audits
- Budget and Policy Analysis
- Office of the Governor, Division of Financial Management
- Office of the State Controller
- Department of Education
- Department of Health and Welfare
- Idaho State University
- US Department of Education
- Idaho Council for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
- Idaho Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired
- Idaho Association of School Administrators
- School districts
- Cochlear Corporation
Paul Headlee (project lead), Ned Parrish, and Brook Smith of the Office of Performance Evaluations
conducted the study; Courtney Haines, an intern from Boise State University, assisted with research.
Rachel Johnstone and Margaret Campbell performed the quality control and desktop publishing, respectively.
Additional assistance was provided by four consultants:
- Tedd McDonald, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Psychology, Boise State University
- Donna Mertens, Ph.D., Professor, Educational Foundations and Research,
Gallaudet University
- Kathleen Sullivan, Ph.D., Associate Professor and Director of the
Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, University of Mississippi
- Bob Thomas of Robert C. Thomas & Associates. Mr. Thomas is also Principal Management Auditor at the King County Auditor’s
Office in Seattle, Washington
| 
