Future Options Those experienced in transporting children with
special needs can cite any number of challenges, from the basics of making the experience as convenient as possible for riders (which includes the availability of wheelchair lifts or other assistive equipment) to meeting the expectations of parents. More recently, the com- plexities of operating during a pandemic have added more layers of concern. Even with the best of intentions, bringing a third party into the already existing connec- tions between school personnel and parents expands the scope of potential difficulty. Whether that means the actual potential for contracting illness or a possible fail- ure to meet expectations of parents from different ends of the COVID-avoidance spectrum, dealing with private providers can involve more monitoring than would oth- erwise be the case. Nevertheless, the services offered by alternative provid-
ers come with an acceptable measure of risk, said Marcus Henthorn, managing director, public sector and K-12 ed- ucational markets for Illinois-based insurance brokerage,
risk management and consulting firm Arthur J. Gallagher and Company. With proper planning and consistent oversight, potential problems can often be avoided. “The service expectations are the same regardless of
who is providing the transportation,” he noted. “What’s required is a heightened degree of due diligence for vendors that don’t necessarily have the same breadth or tenure of traditional service providers.” This is true both at the initial evaluation stage and
during any on-going service period. Ensuring that appro- priate contractual mechanisms are in place is absolutely critical, Henthorn stressed. They include insurance, technologies, staff background checks and driving history reviews, incident reporting, and contract auditing. “The obligation is to ensure that any provider, be it a
district staff, a traditional contractor, or an alternative provider, is properly organized and staffed to address the challenges of transporting students with disabilities,” Henthorn added. Meanwhile, Furby at Fairfax County said that open communication can go a long way in avoiding pitfalls.
55% School districts/bus
companies that allow special education students to be
transported in a vehicle other than a yellow school bus. (Out of 162 responses.)
36 School Transportation News • MARCH 2022
82%
School districts/bus companies that offer training on how to
safely evacuate students in child passenger safety restraints. (Out of 163 responses.)
Most Frequently Used
Alternative Vehicles to Transport Special Education Students: 74%Van
6% App-based vehicle 6% Taxi
16% Mini vans/SUV 6%Transit bus (Out of 89 responses.
Total does not equal 100, multiple answers allowed.)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68
