By Carlos Avalos
Antoinette Jensen, a former Etiwanda School District early childhood general education teacher, says the district’s meshing of three-and-four year old preschool students with special needs and general education preschoolers of the same age together with older prekindergartners into the district’s marquee early education classes created a volatile situation that was, at best, not helpful to many of the students and damaging to some.
The Etiwanda School District initiated its Creating Learning Opportunities Utilizing Diverse Strategies program, which is known by the acronym CLOUDS, in 2005. CLOUDS was originally designed to allow special education preschool students 3-to-4 years of age to attend classes alongside general education preschool students of the same age range. Each preschool class in the CLOUDS program was and continues to be supervised by two professionals: a certified special education instructor and a certified general education instructor. Mrs. Jenson was the certified general education instructor for CLOUDS classes.
Jensen started with the Etiwanda School District ten years ago. Her job title was early childhood educator. Early child educators in this context focus on children aged three to five, those of traditional preschool or kindergarten age. Jensen relayed to the Sentinel that she had been involved in the Etiwanda School District’s CLOUDS program for seven years. According to the Etiwanda School District’s website, Etiwanda.org, the CLOUDS system is designed to be an inclusive setting composed of special education preschool students and their general education peers from the community.  The placement of special education students in the CLOUDS program, which mixes mainstream students with selected special needs students, is based on an education strategy tailored for each specific student.
The CLOUDS concept of mixing mainstream students with selected special needs students relied on a formula that involved mapping out an individualized education plan, referred to as an IEP. A goal in creating the individualized education strategy was to create the least restrictive environment for a student to receive special education support and services. The placement of a special education student in a general education setting is based on space availability and district efforts to meet enrollment criteria. Under the district’s guidelines for the CLOUDS program, students were to have the benefit of the simultaneous classroom presence of a certified early childhood special education teacher working alongside an early childhood general education instructor.
Jensen started as a proctor in the district and advanced into the position of early childhood general education teacher. Special education teachers and general education teachers address different scenarios and issues among the different sets of children they are teaching. Nevertheless, according to Jensen, each teacher is supposed to be equally responsible for each student and equally responsible for individualized educational program goals and implementation.
Jensen needed to approve and formally agree with the individualized education programs for the students. This meant she and the special education teacher both had to examine and come to a consensus on the individualized education programs together. The Etiwanda School District claims that for the purposes of the CLOUDS program, the positions of special education teacher and general education teacher are equal. Jensen noted that the district’s special education teachers are members of the Etiwanda Teachers Association, which is affiliated with the California Teachers Association, while the early childhood educators had no union representation.
Classes that mix students with and without learning disabilities are referred to as “full-inclusion classrooms.” The district’s intention in operating such co-taught full-inclusion classrooms is to provide a learning environment where all students, regardless of their learning abilities or learning styles, are given the experience before entering kindergarten of experiencing a general education classroom. A special education teacher devotes most of her teaching time in CLOUDS classrooms to those with learning disabilities and is designated by the district as the “case manager” of every individualized education program for that particular classroom.
Despite the district’s representation that the special education teacher and general education teacher are co-equals in the CLOUD learning environment and both teachers must sign the individualized education program designed for each student, according to Jensen, the district entrusts the full individualized education plan to the special education teacher in each class exclusively.
“The general education teacher has no legal access to the full individualized education plan,” she did. “If the special education teacher doesn’t share it, there is no access to it. The general education teacher sees the plan only at a glance. When a special education teacher controls all this, there is a potential for misunderstandings, mix-ups, and improprieties.”
Parents are permitted to look at their child’s specific individualized education program, if they make such a request.
Jensen said she sat in on hundreds of individualized education programs, during the course of which she uttered only a sentence or two. As someone who was not empowered to author individualized education documents, she felt it safest from her standpoint to say nothing or very little, as she was not represented, as a general education teacher, by a union. This perception of liability among those teachers is paralyzing, Jensen said.
She said that special education teachers work on the individualized education programs alone at home and give the general education teacher a rundown of the plans without allowing them to participate in the drafting. In the model of a fully inclusive co-teaching classroom, both the general education and special education teachers are intended to operate as equals, each bringing their own credentialed expertise to serve the diverse needs of students. However, the structure of the individualized education program creates an inherent imbalance, according to Jensen.
This division, Jensen noted, creates a significant barrier to true collaboration and general education teachers tend to remain silent, even if they have relevant classroom insights to share.
Thus muzzled by the system and rarely asked to contribute in the individualized education planning process, Jensen had little choice but to acquiesce in having the special education teachers she worked with develop the individualized education plans unilaterally, oftentimes outside contracted hours. This mode of operation, Jensen said, left general education teachers under-informed and over-exposed, creating conditions where they are expected to sign legal documents without full access or adequate training.
During COVID-19 pandemic, only special education students were offered in-person instruction in the Etiwanda School District. Jensen, a general education early childhood educator without a special education credential, was assigned to teach in a special education classroom alongside a credentialed special education teacher. Unrepresented by the union, she was among the first required to return in person. When she inquired about union representation, just as other teachers had done through their union president, she was reprimanded.
In June 2022, the district expanded the CLOUDS program to include in its classes transitional kindergarten (TK) students – students who are too old to be admitted to preschool but too young to be admitted to kindergarten. At the same time, the district increased the number of school sites offering CLOUDS classes from three to thirteen. Proponents of the expansion claimed that their aim was to enrich the preschool learning environment and set a strong early foundation in learning.
Superintendent Charlayne Sprague stated, “The Etiwanda School District plans to partner transitional kindergarten with the Clouds Preschool to provide a full day of extended learning. “CLOUDS- TK is now available at each elementary site.”
To teach transitional kindergarten, teachers must possess a multi-subject credential along with accumulated early childhood units. It thus seemed the district was violating the state educational code when it made the transition.
Teachers the Sentinel spoke to who asked that there names not be used said the change was undertaken to bring more revenue into the district. The district did this by tapping into two funding sources: Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP) funds and Medi-Cal funding. That money came into the district in addition to the supplemental and concentration grants provided through the State of California’s Local Control Funding Formula, known within educational circles by its acronym, LCFF, which had previously been a primary funding source for the CLOUDS program. Through the Local Control Funding Formula, school districts can obtain money for the educational enrichment of unduplicated students. An unduplicated student is one who is either an English learner, a foster child, or eligible for free or reduced-price meals. For each unduplicated student enrolled in the CLOUDS program, the district received funding.
The Expanded Learning Opportunities Program is a state program that provides school districts with funds for after-school activities. The district placed transitional kindergarten students who had attended the CLOUDS morning classes into preschool classrooms for the second half of the day. The district then filed for state reimbursement through the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program, claiming the secondary placement qualified as an after-school program.
According to teachers, the district district also claimed Medi-Cal reimbursement for services provided to individualized educational program students in those classrooms by combining unduplicated general education students in the CLOUDS program with special education students for billing purposes—treating them interchangeably to generate additional revenue, despite those general education students not qualifying under Medi-Cal eligibility criteria. At the same time, the district charged general education preschool families – those who are not low-income, not English learners or not foster households – to participate in the program. This ran afoul of state regulations, according to the teachers because when general education students are included to fulfill the least restrictive environment requirement in an individualized educational program, families should not be charged under the Free Appropriate Public Education mandate.
This undermined the program’s integrity and has turned what should be an inclusive public service into a pay-to-participate model, the teachers said. .
Internal documents and staff reports suggest this wasn’t a mistake; it was a calculated move to pull in extra money from multiple sources. By mislabeling these students as “unduplicated,” they inflated their Local Control Funding Formula funding. At the same time, the district used Expanded Learning Opportunities Program grant funds meant for after-school care to illegally cover the cost of core classroom instruction. In this way, according to the teachers, the district was involved in a coordinated scheme to triple-dip: pulling funds from the Local Control Funding Formula, Expanded Learning Opportunities Program and Medi-Cal by faking student classifications.
Jensen stated that 2022 transition was difficult because the program expanded from three sites to thirteen K-5 sites, entailing substantive expense because each site needed to meet requirements in the Americans with Disabilities Act, such as having changing tables, which cost thousands of dollars.
Based on local control and accountability plan data, according to Jensen, there was a 775 percent increase in unduplicated students between 2022 and 2025.
According to, placing the transitional kindergarten children, who were five years old, into a preschool classroom did them a disservice by basically moving them backwards instead of keeping them at the right grade level for their age. The program was originally designed to include 3-year-old students with special needs alongside general education preschoolers. It later started including 4- and 5-year-olds—children who were legally too old for preschool. Placing older students in classrooms meant for younger kids and teaching them below their grade level, Jensen said, had a ripple effect. In that setting, the older children became bored and unengaged, Jensen said.
Students spent half their day in transitional kindergarten and were then improperly placed into a preschool class to to justify the district’s use of Expanded Learning Opportunities Program funds.
Jensen said that the meshing of the special education preschool classes with the general education preschool classes and the transitional kindergarten classes led to a situation in which the district evaded accurate accounting and legal compliance. When programs serve mixed populations but are funded by restricted sources like special education entitlements, Jensen said, those expenditures must be accounted for separately. Mixing special education and general education funds creates an inaccurate version of the budget overall and opens the door to serious audit issues, she said, since without proper cost separation, it becomes impossible to know whether special education funds were used as intended or improperly diverted.
Jensen said she reported to her school’s principal that the transitional kindergarten students were bored as a consequence of being put into a CLOUDS classroom setting that included younger general education students and younger special education students. Her advocacy was ineffective she said, because, lacking union representation, she lost out when her teaching partner brought her stronger special education credentials and union protection to bear, such that Jensen was ignored and dismissed. As Jensen began to assert herself and advocate more openly, tensions grew. Rather than the district addressing her concerns, she said, the situation turned hostile and she became increasingly more isolated in that environment.
When she put her concerns into the form of a complaint to the district’s human resources division, Jensen said, she was retaliated against. In essence, according to Jensen, her knowledge of the district’s corner cutting with regard to program funding, her knowledge that the district was misapplying the state’s mandate to make use of the least restrictive environment to routinely placed high-needs students into the CLOUDS program, even when a more restrictive setting may have been more appropriate based on the child’s individual needs put her crosswise with the district administration. She had no support from the special education teachers who were going along with the district. She stated that leadership within the program was aware that the expansion was not in compliance with state regulations. Her classroom served some of the most significantly impacted three-year-old children with disabilities. According to Mrs. Jensen, the district, strictly to generate more revenue, allowed many students to remain in the district program, even when individual needs may have been better supported in a county-level setting.
Jensen recalled being discouraged from seeking timely support from program coordinators. Instead, she was instructed to implement all possible interventions and to document extensively before escalating concerns. Even in cases involving severe behavioral episodes, including self-harm or aggression, she was expected to focus on data collection rather than requesting immediate assistance. This approach placed both staff and students at risk and created a climate of fear and continued professional isolation, she maintains.
Jensen told the Sentinel that there were ongoing concerns regarding classroom placements for students with complex medical and behavioral needs, including those with emotional disturbances and other disabilities. Jensen reported that, over time, student behaviors in the program became increasingly severe. She described a serious incident in which she was bitten by a student so badly that she required medical intervention, including numerous shots due to concerns about blood-borne pathogens. District administration advised Jensen to focus on implementing interventions rather than seeking further assistance.
Jensen indicated that the district did not adequately anticipate student behaviors that represented a safety risk to other students or teachers and, accordingly, did not provide adequate or realistic training with regard to what should be done in such instances. The district was non-responsive in the face of requests that those circumstances be recognized. Jensen’s advocacy for the general education students in the face of the danger represented by the behavior of some special needs students resulted in her estrangement from her special education classroom partner, followed by the district removing her from that classroom. She was then transferred to Terra Vista Elementary in 2024, where she was teamed with a new and inexperienced teacher, one who was not fully credentialed and was seeking to complete a two-year in-classroom teacher-training program to obtain her credential.
The environment in the transitional kindergarten classroom Jensen and the neophyte teacher were assigned to was particularly demanding, serving students with significant sensory and behavioral needs. Jensen observed that he colleague appeared to be struggling to manage the classroom effectively. There were occasions where the novice special education instructor raised her voice at students and used overly forceful redirection techniques Jensen believed were inappropriate for children with sensory processing challenges. These included physically pulling students by the arm and placing them into chairs with excessive force. Jensen felt these acts were inconsistent with trauma-informed and developmentally appropriate practices. Jensen expressed these concerns to the administration and documented her efforts to support both her colleague and the students.
She also emphasized the need for calm communication strategies and inclusive support, such as visual cards, which she used regularly to help students express emotions or needs nonverbally. While working in the CLOUDS program at Terra Vista Elementary, Jensen reported increasing concerns about classroom practices under the direction of the teacher she had been teamed with. Jensen said the special education teacher dismissed the use of individualized communication supports required by the district’s speech pathologist.
Mrs. Jensen reported that the visual aids designed to help nonverbal and sensory-sensitive students express their needs were removed or discarded, which led to a noticeable increase in student frustration and behavioral escalations. Jensen expressed to her colleague that the strategies being used did not align with what she knew to be ethical or effective for young children, particularly those with sensory needs.
Jensen’s teaching partner introduced outside items purchased from local stores to use with students’ materials that had not been recommended or approved by the assigned service providers. Mrs. Jensen raised concerns that these interventions were not evidence-based or aligned with the students’ support plans, and later, service providers confirmed her concern the unapproved tools may have confused students or contradicted established strategies were legitimate. One example, she told the Sentinel, involved the use of a loofah purchased from a dollar store to provide sensory input to young boys by rubbing their backs over partially lifted shirts.
Multiple staff members also reported similar concerns to Mrs. Jensen. She was informed that, in a group setting, at least one staff member had directly addressed her teaching colleague’s loud and escalated tone when working with students, encouraging a calmer and more regulated approach. The issues persisted, impacting the classroom environment and, as the year progressed, Jensen began documenting specific incidents. These included physical redirections she believed were excessive, such as pulling students by the arm or abruptly forcing them into chairs. She also personally observed one student being slammed into a seat by the teacher.
Jensen reported the issue, she said to Principal Kimberly Pollock and Vice Principal Monica Apodaca at Terra Vista Elementary. When corrective action was not taken and the issues persisted, she reported the matter to the district’s Human Resources department and submitted formal documentation to Damita Walton, the district’s human resources director, and Assistant Superintendent Laura Rowand. According to Jensen, the district did not make a mandatory report of the rough treatment of a student to the proper authorities.
Believing that addressing the relevant issues early and constructively was necessary to maintain a safe, supportive, learning environment, especially given the behavioral and sensory needs of the students they served, Jensen made a report herself. She received no support, Jensen said, she received little support, and the situation ultimately escalated.
Mrs. Jensen said many of the behavioral challenges stemmed from transitional kindergarten students being regressed into a preschool setting that did not match their age or developmental needs rather than any failing on the students’ part. Despite recognizing the inappropriate placement and its impact, Mrs. Jensen was obligated to contact the parents to address student behaviors resulting from the district’s non-compliant decisions. She made reports and raised concerns, but the environment remained unchanged, and the behavior of her teaching partner became increasingly troubling, she related.
Reflecting on the experience, Jensen believes the district knowingly created an illegal and inappropriate classroom setting and then placed the burden of its consequences on teachers. Rather than address the structural failure, the district ignored reports and allowed retaliation to unfold, punishing educators who advocated for compliance and student well-being. Throughout her time in the classroom, Mrs. Jensen noted that concerns regarding her teaching partner’s behavior were reflected in other staff members noting them informally. She believed that the loud and escalated tone used in the classroom may have contributed to increased dysregulation among students, many of whom relied on predictable, low-stimulation environments to thrive.
There was a restroom in the classroom for the students who could go by themselves. There was no changing table in the classroom, so Jensen’s teaching partner would lay them on the ground or change them standing up, which is difficult for students with disabilities. With the 2022 expansion of the CLOUDS program, not every classroom had a changing table. If kids had to go to the restroom outside of class, the two aides would not be in the classroom, making the classroom out of compliance with the rules and regulations. Best practice is to have two aides together when changing a general or special education student, but that would leave the classroom out of ratio and non-compliant.
Her teaching colleague started taking a little boy to the restroom alone, outside of the classroom. Jensen told her to stop doing this. The aides noticed as well. The official process was that the two aides take the child, change his or her clothes, and then take the child to the school’s administration office to document the incident. Parents are supposed to be informed through the Aeries system, where notes can be added about the child. The requirement for this program was that children needed to be potty-trained. Jensen’s teaching partner claimed the child was afraid of the toilet flushing, but this was never documented in Aeries, despite the teacher referencing it in her response to Jensen’s complaints to the special education department and site principals.
Jensen reported the incident to Elisabeth Freer, the Special Education Director, and the CLOUDS secretary, Gina Romain. She was told, “Kids sometimes have accidents.” Jensen, having worked in the program for years, was already well aware of this. After informing Freer, she was later reprimanded by Principal Kim Pollock, who stated that on-site concerns should be addressed through the school, not elevated to the district. Given the prior retaliation she experienced at Terra Vista, Mrs. Jensen felt school-level reporting would be ineffective. She brought the matter to the district because she believed no meaningful change would occur otherwise.
Despite multiple reports, there was no record of the child’s toileting incidents in the Aeries system. On 12/1/23, Jensen filed a child abuse report. The child continued having accidents, and her teaching colleague continued taking the child to the restroom alone. Jensen was told to ignore the matter. Her partner’s behavior kept escalating, according to Jensen. When she contacted Child Protective Services (CPS), she was told the agency does not handle teacher-versus-teacher matters and was instructed to report it to the school or contact law enforcement.
Jensen documented her call to CPS with Human Resources Representative Damita Walton and Assistant Superintendent Laura Rowland. Finally, the principal and vice-principal interviewed the teacher, who was pulled from the class in early December 2023. Throughout the month of December 2023, according to Jensen, she was retaliated against. She was then placed on leave. She was told that her being on site was hindering the investigation. She was then banned from every Etiwanda site.
She was instructed to not speak to any of her coworkers. She then got an advocate and contested her termination in order to be reinstated in a job she treasured because of the opportunity it provided for her to help children.
Jensen had repeatedly raised concerns about the child being taken alone to the restroom. According to the child’s mother, a doctor later confirmed that the child had been sexually abused. The Sentinel spoke directly with the child’s parents. The mother said she had been confused by her son’s sudden behavioral changes and frequent accidents at school. When she asked what was going on, the boy identified a teacher in the classroom and told her that the lights were turned off, that he was hit, and—in his own words—that the teacher “pinched/hurt his wee wee.” This account is also part of the public record, documented in legal filings available through ongoing litigation.
When the mother of child in question took her son to his primary doctor, she related what her boy was saying to her, that his teacher hurt him, and explained everything to the doctor as the child had framed it.  The child’s doctor offered his assessment that “Your little boy is telling you everything you need to know about what happened.” When the doctor examined the child, the boy repeated to the doctor what he had told his mother.
The Etiwanda School District/Terra Vista Elementary were contacted by the Sentinel and asked for a statement in regards to these allegations. David Oates, a newly hired public relations specialist, stated, “We can confirm the lawsuit filed by a former Etiwanda School District teacher. While we cannot discuss the ongoing matter in detail during active litigation, we are confident that the legal process will demonstrate that this former faculty member is not being truthful. Nevertheless, we take all allegations of this nature seriously and investigate all claims of this type of wrongdoing. This commitment is part of our dedication to fostering a safe and supportive learning environment for all our students.” When asked about the whereabouts of of Jensen’s teaching colleague when she was working at Terra Vista Elementary, Oates stated, “She left on her own accord from the district about a year ago.”