Who is really accountable in PGCPS?

The concerns surrounding Lake Arbor Elementary School extend beyond the experiences of individual students and families. They also raise serious questions about the district’s oversight, workplace culture, and accountability. Throughout the 2025-2026 school year, complaints regarding student safety, special education services, staffing, leadership, and school climate were repeatedly reported to Area 1 leadership, including Instructional Director Andrew Dalton. Parents, staff, advocates, and community members consistently documented concerns through emails, meetings, phone calls, and mailed correspondence. Yet many of these concerns remained unresolved. Who is accountable for this in Area 1 office? This raises an important question: if so many concerns were repeatedly elevated throughout the school year, why did they never appear to result in meaningful district intervention? Families deserve to know whether information was being appropriately escalated beyond the Area 1 Office or whether it stalled before reaching senior leadership. Again, who should be held accountable for this in Area 1 office? Ms. Dana Edwards, as Human Resources leadership, was your office aware of the volume of complaints regarding Lake Arbor? If not, why not? If so, what actions were taken to protect students and staff? Children were hurt during the school day? We respectfully request an independent audit examining: ● Staff transfers and resignations during the past two school years. ● Employees placed on administrative leave or performance improvement plans. ● Workers’ compensation claims related to student incidents. ● Police reports and incident reports involving students or staff. ● Medical documentation associated with workplace injuries, where appropriate and legally reviewable. ● Student disciplinary records, including suspensions, to determine whether incidents were appropriately documented and retained in accordance with district policy. There are also questions regarding whether disciplinary records involving students in the PS-74 program from the past two years were properly maintained. If disciplinary documentation or electronic records are missing, families deserve an explanation. An independent review should determine whether records were created, maintained, and preserved in accordance with district policy. Additionally, concerns have been raised by staff regarding workplace culture and administrative treatment. We have heard reports that employees felt intimidated or discouraged from speaking up about concerns. If true, that type of environment undermines transparency and ultimately harms students. One particularly troubling concern involves a teacher with autism who, according to reports, experienced repeated conflict with school administration throughout the year and was later placed on administrative leave. If a district is committed to supporting students with disabilities, it must also ensure that employees with disabilities are treated fairly, receive appropriate support, and are evaluated consistently with district policy. An independent review should examine whether proper coaching, mentoring, and supervisory practices were followed. Dr Sothern aren't you an autism advocate and mom? Why would you let this happen to a staff member? Similarly, concerns have been raised regarding a first-year fourth-grade teacher who reportedly experienced ongoing workplace difficulties before resigning prior to the end of the school year. If new teachers are leaving because they do not receive adequate support, coaching, or protection, the district should examine whether leadership practices are contributing to unnecessary turnover. Parents are also seeking clarification regarding statements reportedly made during a faculty meeting encouraging staff to stop submitting complaints regarding the principal. If such statements were made, the district should determine whether staff felt discouraged from reporting legitimate concerns through established channels. Who should be held accountable for this Andrew Dalton after you stood in front of the faculty and staff and called them liars when the climate survey showed different? Since Kassandra Lassiter was in attendance who is holding Area 1 office accountable for letting this happen? None of these concerns should be viewed in isolation. Together, they suggest a pattern that warrants independent review. This is not about assigning blame without evidence. It is about accountability. Students deserve safe schools. Parents deserve transparency. Teachers deserve professional support and respectful leadership. When multiple families, employees, and community members raise similar concerns over an extended period, the appropriate response is not silence—it is an independent investigation. The question before Prince George’s County Public Schools is simple: Who is accountable when repeated warnings are documented, concerns continue to be raised throughout an entire school year, and meaningful intervention never occurs? In addition, serious concerns have been raised that the autism program itself is out of compliance with federal and state special education requirements. Families have reported missed or delayed evaluations, failure to conduct timely reevaluations, inconsistent or reduced service hours, lack of appropriate inclusion opportunities, and gaps in related services such as speech therapy, occupational therapy, and adaptive physical education. Who is held accountable for all of the special education staff that works in the autism program that do not have the proper credentials for special education? These issues, if substantiated, represent violations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which guarantees students a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and requires that services outlined in Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) be delivered as written. Under IDEA, when a district fails to provide required services or evaluations, it may be obligated to provide compensatory education services to make up for lost instruction and supports. Families deserve clear answers as to whether compensatory services will be provided and whether additional remedies, including reimbursement, will be considered where appropriate. Furthermore, there must be clarity regarding accountability for these systemic failures. Who is responsible for ensuring compliance within the autism program, and what role did program leadership, including Trinell Bowman, play in overseeing these services? If students have been out of compliance across evaluations, service delivery, and inclusion mandates, the district must identify responsible parties and take corrective action to ensure that such failures do not continue. Dr. Sothern, are you still meeting with the school on Monday as you stated to the entire Lake Arbor Community to address the parents concerns since you turned off the comments on Class Dojo? Dr, Joseph, respectfully you have signed your contract for SY26-27 but when these concerns were brought to you this school year why were families turned away? Why did you act like you cared in public forums but turned a blind eye when we wrote you letters crying for help? No one wants to be held accountable. We used the proper lines of succession to no avail. This is exactly what is wrong with PGCPS.