AFC appreciates the Council’s goal of identifying disparities in students’ ability to access to special education programs and related services in a timely manner, as well as ways the City can potentially address such disparities. We want to ensure that any entity tasked with carrying out a comprehensive study of the type described in Intro 853 has the expertise, resources, and capacity required to do so. This includes, for example, access to relevant student-level data; a deep understanding of the complexities of the City’s special education system and of past policy changes and reform efforts; and the time and capacity to meaningfully engage with a wide array of stakeholders, including students, parents and caregivers, advocates, and educators. A study that relies on surface-level analysis, lacks historical perspective, or fails to consider the knowledge and perspectives of New Yorkers with lived experience will be of limited utility.

We have several recommendations for strengthening the bill, which are described below. Suggested language for incorporating such changes can be found in the attached redlined version of Intro 853.

Ensure the study examines both preschool and school-age special education.

We urge the Council to amend Intro 853 to specify that the study should examine both preschool (ages 3–5) and school-age (ages 5–22) special education, as we are concerned that the bill could otherwise be interpreted as only applicable to programs and services for students with disabilities in grades K–12. We appreciate the Council’s past efforts to draw attention to—and push New York City Public Schools (NYCPS) to address—the shortage of seats in preschool special education classes and the consistently large number of 3- and 4-year-olds not receiving their mandated services. While the City has taken important steps in recent years to address these systemic violations of preschoolers’ legal rights, preschoolers continue to experience delays in accessing their legally mandated services. Moreover, if the study is to offer well-informed recommendations for addressing disparities in access to evaluations and services, it is critical that it consider a child’s full educational career and the entire special education system. For example, a recommendation promoting the creation of incentives for speech therapists to take jobs in public elementary schools could inadvertently exacerbate provider shortages for preschoolers if existing speech therapists leave jobs working with preschoolers to take such positions.

Add housing status as a measure of economic disadvantage and ensure the study considers the intersection of economic need, home language, and geography.

We encourage the Council to expand the economic factors examined in the study to include housing status, not just family income. More than 100,000 New York City students experience homelessness each year, and these students face educational barriers above and beyond those experienced by permanently housed students from low-income families. In 2024–25, for example, 11% of K–12 students with IEPs in temporary housing did not fully receive their mandated special education instruction, compared to 6% of students with IEPs in permanent housing.

We further recommend adding language to specify that the study should examine the intersection of the factors (language access needs, economic need, geographic location) laid out in the bill, not just disparities by each factor on its own; as written, it is unclear whether Intro 853 requires as much. Students often fall into more than one of these categories of analysis, and it would be helpful to tease out the implications of these intersections before developing recommendations for targeted outreach, resources, and support. For example, low-income families who speak a language other than English face different obstacles than low-income families who are fluent in English.

Include all stages of the special education process.

The first stage of the special education process is the referral for evaluation, not the evaluation itself. While the law includes requirements related to referring a child suspected of having a disability for evaluation, AFC has worked with many families of students who were not appropriately and timely identified, despite clear evidence that they were struggling and in need of additional support. We therefore recommend modifying both the definition of “access” (Section 1(a)) and the list of stages during which families may encounter barriers (Section 1(c)(2)) to include identification.

Require analysis of access to specific programs and services known to have limited availability and capacity.

Section 1(c)(1) of Intro 853 would be strengthened by specifying that the study’s analysis of the availability, capacity, and geographic distribution of special education programs and services should include:

• Each of the City’s specialized programs, including ASD Nest/Horizon and AIMS, which serve autistic students; PATH, which serves students who need intensive behavioral support; the Academics, Career, and Essential Skills (ACES) program, which serves students with intellectual disabilities in District 1–32 schools; and IREAD, an inclusive program for students with dyslexia and other reading challenges;
• Bilingual special education classes and related services;
• District 75 programs and services, including District 75 inclusion; and
• Outside service providers (such as speech and occupational therapists) whom the City pays to fill gaps in the system.

AFC frequently works with families who have encountered barriers in accessing each of the above programs and services. For example, we have heard from parents who thought the Nest or Horizon program would be a perfect fit for their child, but who were turned away due to the limited number of available seats; from immigrant families for whom the closest bilingual special education class was a long bus ride away; and from parents who called dozens of service providers but were unable to find anyone in their neighborhood who had availability to work with their child and was willing to accept NYCPS’ Related Service Authorization (RSA) rate.