Transcript IDEA Updates, Current Legislative Action, & Advocacy

IDEA Updates, Current
Legislative Action, & Advocacy
Dr. Lynn R. Zubov
Winston-Salem State University
NC-CEC CAN Coordinator
September 2007
NC CEC Western Carolina Regional Conference
[email protected]
IDEA Updates
Definitions
New, Modified, and Crossed
Referenced
Modified Definitions

Supplementary aids and services

Supplementary aids and services are now to be
provided in extracurricular and nonacademic
settings in addition to the general education
classes other education-related setting
Modified Definitions

Child with a disability


Tourette syndrome is now listed as a chronic or acute
health problem under other health impaired
Assistive technology


IDEA 2004 clarifies that surgically implanted devices are
not assistive technology devices (e.g. cochlear implants)
National Instructional Material Accessibility Standards
(NIMAS) guides the production and electronic distribution
of digital versions of textbooks and other instructional
materials so they can be more easily converted to
accessible formats, including Braille and text-to-speech
IEP
Consent, Evaluation, Participation, and
Eligibility
Consent


As with IDEA 97, IDEA 2004, requires that
parent(s)/guardian(s) provide informed
consent prior to an initial evaluation.
Consent must be given in written form
however e-mail is acceptable mode of
communication
Consent and Evaluation


The timeline for initial evaluation is now 60 days
from the date of parental consent (unless the State
has an established timeline),
The 60-day timeline does not apply if:



parent repeatedly fail to produced the child for evaluation,
or
the child enrolls in another school district.
If a parent does not provide consent for services,
the LEA cannot use consent override procedures
and will not be considered in violation of FAPE.
Eligibility




IDEA 2004 has only a few but important changes to
eligibility.
A child may not be determined eligible of if the main
reason for poor academic performance was a lack of
appropriate instruction or limited English proficiency,
as defined in NCLB.
The state can no longer require that a LEA use the
discrepancy model.
LEAs may to use opt a response-to-intervention
(RTI) model.
IEP Participants

IDEA 2004 requires the same participants as
the early law, however members of the team
can be excused from all or part of the
meeting, if



The individual’s curricular area or related service
is not being addressed, or
If the member provides written input for the
meeting.
In both cases the LEA and the parent most agree
on the member’s absence
IEP Participants


An IEP Team meeting can be held without the
child’s parent(s) in attendance if the agency
cannot convince the parents to attend
If so, detailed records of attempts must be
kept.
IEP Contents


There are two major changes, short-term
objectives and transition planning
Short-term objective

According to the new law, the IEP no longer has
to develop short-term objectives unless the child
is participating in an alternative form of
assessment
IEP Contents

Transition planning


According to the new law, the IEP team must
consider transition needs and develop a transition
plan at age 16 instead of 14
Additionally, IDEA 2004 requires that
students who graduate or age-out must be
provided with a written summary of academic
and functional skills that include
recommendations for assisting the student
with postsecondary goal.
IEP

A student’s IEP can follow the student


When a child moves from another state, the
receiving state must either adopt the prior IEP or
promptly conduct an evaluation
Changes to the IEP may be made after the
annual IEP team meeting without convening
the entire IEP team meet if the parents and
public agency agree

However the IEP team must be informed of any
changes
Mandatory Medication Prohibition


May not require a child to obtain a
prescription of a controlled substance as a
condition of attending school, receiving an
evaluation, or receiving services under the
IDEA.
May still share observations of the student’s
performance or behavior in the classroom or
school with the parents.
Due Process
Procedural safeguards and disciplinary
procedures
Procedural Safeguards


A parent is entitled to only one independent
educational evaluation at public expense
each time the parent disagrees with the
agency’s evaluation
Generally, procedural safeguards notice are
given to the parents 1 time a year
Discipline
Disciplinary Procedures



May of the provisions of IDEA 97 remain in
place.
However, “inflicting serious bodily injury” has
been added to the special circumstances
under which students can be placed in an
interim setting for up to 45 days.
Additionally, the 45 day period is now 45
school days.
45-School Day Removal


Adds infliction of serious bodily injury to list of
offenses (including drugs and weapons) resulting in
the 45-school day removal to Interim Alternative
Educational Setting.
Serious bodily injury means bodily injury that
involves:




A substantial risk of death;
Extreme physical pain;
Protracted and obvious disfigurement; or
Protracted loss or impairment of a function of a bodily
member, organ or faculty.
Manifestation Determination

If the behavior was a manifestation of the
child’s disability:

IEP team must conduct a functional behavioral
assessment (FBA) and behavioral intervention
plan (BIP) for the child, or review an existing plan
and modify it as necessary to address the
behavior.
Manifestation Determination


If the behavior is a manifestation, the child is
returned to the pre-discipline placement,
unless the parent and LEA agree otherwise.
If the school decides to change placement,
parent may request mediation or due
process.
Stay-Put

Due process hearings to contest disciplinary
actions.

The student remains in the discipline setting
pending the hearing officer’s decision or the
expiration of the removal time, whichever occurs
first, unless the parent and LEA agree otherwise.
Current Legislative Action
No Child Left Behind

House Education and Labor Committee Releases Draft
Legislation for the Reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, it
includes
 Graduation rates for all students groups will be disaggregated
 Multiple measures of assessments are included
 Growth models are included
 The maximum "n size" for groups is capped at 30
 Response-to-Intervention is included as a possible intervention
model or strategy for low performing schools
 Early intervening services are included as a possible component
of a targeted assistance program
 States are required to engage in the development of a
comprehensive plan to address the implementation of universal
design for learning among items to support teaching and learning
For NCLB to meet the needs of students with
exceptionalities, CEC has identified the following areas,
among others, for improvement:
 A process must be developed to enable middle and
high school special education teachers who teach
multiple core subjects to demonstrate that they meet
highly qualified requirements via a variety of
methods.
 Student assessment must be changed to more fairly
and accurately measure student progress.


States must be allowed to measure students’ growth in
achievement as well as their performance in relation to predetermined levels of academic proficiency.
Multiple indicators of student achievement, in addition to
standardized tests, should be used to determine student
and school performance.
For NCLB to meet the needs of students with
exceptionalities, CEC has identified the following areas,
among others, for improvement:
 School improvement plans should be allowed
sufficient time to make a difference in student
achievement before sanctions are applied.



Further, sanctions should not be applied if they undermine
existing effective reform efforts.
NCLB must recognize and address the unique
learning needs of students with gifts and talents to
allow these students to realize their potential.
NCLB funding must be increased.


Fully funding NCLB must not reduce expenditures for other
education programs.
Funding must cover a substantial percentage of the cost
states and districts will incur to carry out the law.
CEC’s response to NCLD
Furthermore, CEC is troubled that
 Little or no attention to students with gifts and
talents, an issue that we address in greater
detail below.
 The Committee has chosen to maintain the
goal of proficiency for all students by 2014,

And the overwhelmingly use of sanctions to
punish
Javits Funding



The Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented
grants program received $7.6 million for FY
2008,
This is the same amount of funding that it
received in FY 2007.
In perspective, FY 2008 IDEA Part B funding
is $11.2 billion.
Javits Funding

Senator Charles E. Grassley (R-IA), CEC's
2007 Outstanding Public Service Award, is
committed and continues works towards
increasing the funding for gifted education
Medicaid Reimbursements



On September 7, 2007, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services (CMS), issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making that
would eliminate Medicaid reimbursements for school
transportation and administrative activities.
The proposed regulations would eliminate federal Medicaid
payments for administrative activities performed by school
employees or contractors, or anyone under the control of a public
or private educational institution.
They would also eliminate Medicaid reimbursements for
transportation from home to school and back for school-aged
children with an Individualized Education Program (IEP) or an
Individualized Family Services Plan (IFSP) under IDEA.
What can you do?



Let your voice be heard.
Right your Senators and Representative
Don’t know who they are, go to:
http://www.cec.sped.org/


click on Policy & Adocacy, and than
Legislative Action Center and enter your zip code