Transcript Lessons Learned: PA’s Sometimes Rocky Entrance into IEP

Lessons Learned: Pennsylvania’s
Sometimes Rocky Entrance into
IEP Facilitation
Kerry Voss Smith
Dixie Rider
Pennsylvania: Who Are We?
Lancaster
Pittsburgh
Gettysburg
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania: Who Are We?
•
•
•
•
The Litigious State
P-ARC Consent
Gaskin
More than 250,000
identified school-age
children
• 1036 Due Process
Requests 2004-05
Pennsylvania (agencies?):
Who Are We?
• PA Department of Education
• Bureau of Special Education
• PA Training and Technical Assistance
Network (PaTTAN)
• Intermediate Units
• Local Education Agencies
• Office for Dispute Resolution (ODR)
Office for Dispute Resolution (ODR)
Who Are We?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ConsultLine
Call Resolution Process (CRP)
Dispute Resolution Skills Training (DRST)
IEP Facilitation
Solutions Panels/Teams
Mediation
Due Process
Appeals
Dispute
Resolution
Skills
Training
Mediation
Office for Dispute Resolution
ODR
IEP
Facilitation
Due
Process
Hearing
ODR: Who Are We?
•
•
•
•
•
Tracking – database
Website
Focus Group
Advisory Panel
Continuum
IEP Facilitation – Pilot
• ODR was a recipient of the OSEP General
Supervision Enhancement Grant (GSEG).
General Supervision Enhancement Grant
(GSEG)
• Activities to support and encourage early
resolution of special education disagreements
• 18 IEP Facilitations (8/03- 10/04)
IEP Facilitation – Pilot (GSEG)
ODR contracted with an
Independent educational
consultant with extensive
knowledge and
experience in special
education law, IEP
content and
development, &
facilitation.
Independent Educational Consultant
Advice for Pilot (GSEG)
• Several authorization forms required.
• Required release of educational records 2 weeks
prior to IEP meeting.
• Facilitator have reviewed most recent ER/IEP .
• Extensive and ongoing communication between
Facilitator and all parties in advance is required.
IEP Facilitation – Pilot
Original Conditions
• Directive method of Facilitation
• Meeting belonged to the Facilitator
• Role of Facilitator included providing technical
assistance
• Facilitator directed the crafting of the IEP
• Completed IEP only goal – settle for nothing
less
ODR Marched On
• Expanded training to ODR mediators to
increase pool of Facilitators.
• Used PaTTAN Educational Consultants/PEN
to bring special education expertise.
• Review ER – what should it look like?
• Review IEP – what should it look like?
• Overview content areas of autism/discipline/
reading/progress monitoring.
Pilot – “Pros”
• Upfront communication kept
arguing sides apart – little
interaction until meeting.
• IEP almost always
constructed (many times
after several meetings).
• Students possibly now
receiving more than “FAPE”
-‘best’ instead of
‘appropriate’.
• Parents felt Facilitator was on
their side.
Pilot – “Cons”
• LEA felt loss of control of
IEP meeting.
• Parent groups felt loss of
control of IEP content.
• Issue of confidentiality –
student records
• Expensive!! Much
preparation time before
meeting.
• Expensive!! Several IEP
meetings needed to finalize
IEP.
Pilot – “Cons”
• Time-consuming
• Students possibly now
receiving more than
“FAPE” -‘best’ instead
of ‘appropriate’.
• All parties (& Facilitator)
“digging in their heels”
for own outcomes
Murphy’s Law 101
Pilot – Bottom Line Results
• Discovered that mediation skills and facilitation
skills are NOT the same .
• LEAs hated it.
• Parent groups hated it.
• Grant money ran out.
ODR Reaction
• Shell-shocked
• Humbled
• Decided to punt and rethink!
Did we give up?
NO WAY!!
Questions We Asked
• Overall question: What changes do we need to
make to have parties “buy into” the process?
Questions We Asked
• Who should facilitate?
– Mediators
– Lawyers
– Hearing Officers
Questions We Asked
• What training is necessary?
– Mediation training
– Special education content
– Facilitation
Questions We Asked
• What model will work best for PA?
– Facilitator runs meeting, with agenda.
– Facilitator provides guidance on content.
– Facilitator provides assistance with communication
only.
Questions We Asked
• What procedures will be put in place?
– Contact parties/communicate prior to meeting.
– Release educational records to facilitator.
– Required authorization and consent forms.
What Happened Next?
• Met with PEN.
• Carefully/thoughtfully drafted new procedures.
• Brought in national trainers to provide
Facilitation training.
– Wanted all Facilitators to be trained together.
– Wanted all Facilitators to understand ODR
procedures together.
– Smooth sailing????? Not quite.
What We Learned
• There are many different philosophies
regarding IEP Facilitation
Revised Role of Facilitator
•
•
•
•
•
Facilitative method only
Not a member of the team
IEP team owns the IEP
LEA runs the meeting
Facilitator’s role is only to enhance communication and
to help sides address disagreements or conflict relating
to IEP only.
• Facilitator offers no technical assistance or input
regarding content.
• Facilitator sits in silence if parties are moving forward.
Role of Facilitator
An IEP Facilitator is like a referee…
If the game is going well, there is not much need
for interference. But if the players start to get
out of hand, the referee’s responsibility is to get
more involved to ensure fair play and to keep
the game moving.
IEP Facilitation Materials
• Thanks to CADRE for offering materials for
use in the spirit of dispute resolution!
– IEP Facilitation Information and Procedures
– IEP Facilitation Request Form
– IEP Facilitation Evaluation Form
Dispute
Resolution
Skills
Training
Mediation
IEP
Facilitation
ODR Procedures
Due
Process
Hearing
Office for Dispute
Resolution
ODR
• IEP team sets date
for meeting, and
provides invitation to
participate to parents.
• If IEP Facilitation
requested, form is
signed and forwarded
to other party to
complete, sign, and
forward to ODR.
Dispute
Resolution
Skills
Training
Mediation
IEP
Facilitation
ODR Procedures
Due
Process
Hearing
Office for Dispute
Resolution
ODR
• Facilitator assigned
only after both
parties sign request
form.
• ODR oversees
process, but
ownership is local .
At the IEP Meeting
•
•
•
•
IEP meeting is scheduled by LEA.
Members of the IEP team attend.
The LEA chair starts the meeting.
Facilitator is introduced.
Facilitator Discusses/Clarifies
• Neutrality
• Parameters of role (not a decision-maker, not here as a
special education expert)
• Chair’s role
• Confidentiality
• Logistics (length of time scheduled, order of
discussion, team members leaving or staying, etc)
• Agenda that the team has established
• Ground rules parties want to have in place
IEP Meeting and Beyond
• LEA chair continues with IEP meeting.
• Facilitator intervenes when necessary.
• Expectation is that IEP Facilitator will
participate in 1 team meeting only unless
extreme situation.
• Facilitator reports the general results of the IEP
meeting to ODR.
• ODR does not keep IEPs/documents on file.
Reactions from Facilitators
• Vast difference of
opinion as to how much
prep work, intervening,
participation needed for
success.
Reactions from Facilitators
Some parents view the
Facilitator as an advocate
and are looking for help
in writing the IEP.
Reactions from Facilitators
• Difficult for some
Facilitators to step back
after having been heavily
involved based on pilot’s
procedures.
Reactions from Facilitators
• Some Facilitators have
admitted they can not
facilitate using such a
“hands off ” approach .
Reactions from Facilitators
• Very important to clarify
the role of Facilitator to
all parties; otherwise
expectations might not
be met.
Reactions from Facilitators
In some instances
mediation might be an
option to resolve
disagreements not
related to the IEP.
Reactions from Facilitators
Having documents ahead
of time gives the
facilitator a complete
picture of the student
and it saves valuable time
at the meeting.
Reactions from Participants
• Facilitator was
knowledgeable but
strengths could be better
utilized by being more
involved.
Reactions from Participants
• Having the Facilitator at
the meeting helped the
meeting to be less
heated.
Reactions from Participants
• The presence of the
Facilitator alone kept
everyone on their best
behavior.
Reactions from Participants
• Please get the word out
to parents– this is a great
program that is available.
Reactions from Participants
• Everyone at the table
was happy with the IEP
that was developed.
Reactions from Participants
• As a parent, I feel it is
necessary that the
Facilitator has my child’s
documents before the
meeting.
Reactions from Participants
• The Facilitator’s sense of
humor and quick grasp
of the facts helped the
IEP process immensely.
Reactions from Participants
• We went to mediation,
then to IEP Facilitation,
and did end up in due
process. But by the time
we got to due process,
there were only a few
issues that were
unresolved. We were
very satisfied with each
process.
Reactions from Participants
• The Facilitator was
invisible during the
meeting except when a
problem arose.
Where Are We Now?
• For 2004-05, ODR received 37 IEP Facilitation
requests.
• 24 IEP Facilitations resulted in an agreed-upon
IEP (86%) when meeting held.
• 5 were withdrawn prior to the IEP meeting.
• 4 denied by either parent or LEA.
• 4 did not result in IEP.
IEP Facilitation
What’s Next for ODR?
• Public awareness blitz
• Expanded training
Public Awareness Blitz
•
•
•
•
•
Website
PennLink
Special Education Dispute Resolution Manual
ODR bookmark
Brochure
Public Awareness Blitz
•
•
•
•
BSE Compliance Advisors (SPOCs)
Parent Education Network (PEN)
Speaking Engagements
Conference Attendance/Exhibit Booths
Expanded Training
• Expanded training
• Continue to train mediators to update skills
• Develop new training to assist LEAs with
required Resolution Meeting
– Possibly offering Facilitation for Resolution
Meetings
Lessons Learned: Pennsylvania’s
Sometimes Rocky Entrance into IEP
Facilitation
Contact us at…
ODR
6340 Flank Drive, Suite 600
Harrisburg, PA 17112
(717) 541-4960
http://[email protected]