Source: https://tea.texas.gov/About_TEA/News_and_Multimedia/Correspondence/TAA_Letters/Responsibilities_and_Timelines_Regarding_Parent_Requests_for_Special_Education_Evaluations_under_the_Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act_(IDEA),_TEC,_and_TAC/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 04:57:01+00:00

Document:
SUBJECT: Responsibilities and Timelines Regarding Parent Requests for Special Education Evaluations under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Texas Education Code (TEC), and the Texas Administrative Code (TAC).
We encourage all local educational agencies (LEAs) to review OSEP’s findings and consider the potential implications for their communities.
“TEA failed to ensure that all children with disabilities residing in the State who are in need of special education and related services were identified, located, and evaluated, regardless of the severity of their disability, as required by IDEA section 612(a)(3) and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. §300.111.
TEA failed to ensure that [a free appropriate public education (FAPE)] was made available to all children with disabilities residing in the State in Texas’s mandated age ranges (ages 3 through 21), as required by IDEA section 612(a)(1) and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. §300.101.
If the LEA proposes to conduct an initial evaluation, the LEA must obtain written, parental consent and should promptly complete the initial evaluation report. The LEA must complete the initial evaluation report no later than the 45th school day following the date parental consent is received except in specific situations as outlined in TEC §29.004 and 19 TAC §89.1011(c) and (e).
Suspected of being a child with a disability and in need of special education, even if they are advancing from grade to grade.
An LEA’s failure to meet IDEA’s child find requirements is a serious matter that could result in denying FAPE to a child who is eligible for special education services. Furthermore, the failure to identify a child may entitle the child to compensatory education or tuition reimbursement.
Though the child find mandate applies to students with dyslexia and/or related disorders, OSEP found systemic IDEA violations related to this population. Dyslexia is a lifelong disability that manifests differently in individuals. The disability is generally characterized by an insufficient ability to read, spell, and link letters to sounds. Many students who struggle with dyslexia also grapple with co-occurring disorders, such as dysgraphia, dyscalculia, and ADHD.
In its report, OSEP found that students with dyslexia are often evaluated and accommodated under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regardless of students’ potential need for specialized instruction under IDEA.17 LEAs are reminded that, if a student is suspected to have dyslexia and/or a related disorder and a need for special education services, they must refer the student for an initial evaluation in accordance with 34 C.F.R. §§300.300-300.311. LEAs may not deny an initial evaluation or special education services to a student with dyslexia and/or related disorders because he or she does not present a second, potentially disabling condition.
This spring, under the direction of the State Board of Education, TEA will partner with stakeholders to update the Dyslexia Handbook to clarify IDEA requirements as they relate to screening, evaluating, and serving students with dyslexia and/or related disorders.
LEAs are reminded that parents may also request a referral at any time regardless of whether the child is receiving interventions through the RtI framework.22 OSEP has advised that, unless an LEA believes there is no reason to suspect that a child has a disability and is in need of special education services, an evaluation must be conducted within the applicable timeline.23 If, however, an LEA does not suspect that the child is a child with a disability and denies the request for an initial evaluation, the LEA must provide written notice to the child’s parents explaining why the LEA declines to conduct an initial evaluation and the information that was used as the basis for that decision.24 The parent may then challenge this decision by requesting a due process hearing under 34 CFR §300.507 or filing a complaint under 34 CFR §300.153 to resolve the dispute regarding the child’s need for an evaluation.
Information about the parent’s right to request, among other things, a special education evaluation at any time.
The notice must be written in English or, to the extent practicable, the parent's native language.
TEA developed a model notice that LEAs may use to fulfill the law’s requirements. The notice, an updated Student Handbook Statement for providing assistance to students who have learning difficulties or who need or may need special education, and a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) document on SB 1153, can be found on TEA’s website at https://tea.texas.gov/Academics/Special_Student_Populations/Special_Education/Programs_and_Services/Response_to_Intervention/.
LEAs are subject to mandatory minimum retention periods for various records. For example, LEAs are required to retain special education records for at least five years per Local Schedule SD (revised 2d ed.) under 13 Tex. Admin. Code Chapter 7, Subchapter D. LEAs are reminded that these are minimum state requirements. While the corrective action plan is developed, it is prudent for LEAs to consider whether the records of certain students should continue to be retained. Preserving records beyond the minimum retention period for students who potentially needed services and either have not yet received them or received them on a delayed basis will likely assist in fulfilling the corrective action plan upon final adoption.
“Documentation that the State’s system of general supervision requires that each ISD identifies, locates, and evaluates all children suspected of having a disability who need special education and related services, in accordance with section 612(a)(3) of the IDEA and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. §300.111, and makes FAPE available to all eligible children with disabilities in accordance with section 612(a)(1) of the IDEA and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. §300.101.
Require individualized education program (IEP) Teams to consider, on an individual basis, whether additional services are needed for children previously suspected of having a disability who should have been referred for an initial evaluation and were later found eligible for special education and related services under the IDEA, taking into consideration supports and services previously provided to the child.
Disseminate such information to staff and the parents of children suspected of having a disability enrolled in the [LEA’s] schools, consistent with 34 C.F.R. §300.503(c).
The corrective action plan submitted to OSEP will describe actions TEA will take to meet the requirements listed above.
Over 100 stakeholder meetings were scheduled throughout the month of February in each of the twenty established regions in the state at both Education Service Centers (ESCs) and at LEAs.
Stakeholders had the opportunity to provide feedback on the initial draft in an online survey through February 20, 2018.
Stakeholders have the opportunity to provide ongoing feedback through the official email address: TexasSPED@tea.texas.gov.
On or about March 5, 2018, TEA will release its proposed corrective action plan as part of the SPED Strategic Plan.
Stakeholders may provide feedback on the proposed plan during an additional comments period, which will run through March 31, 2018. Feedback during this period should be submitted to TEA in writing using the email address noted above.
In April, TEA will submit its final corrective action plan to OSEP and will also publish a Special Education Strategic Plan.
For information about how TEA is engaging parents, educators, administrators, school boards, and other stakeholders in the plan’s development, see page 13 of TEA’s initial draft corrective action plan and/or visit the website at www.tea.texas.gov/TexasSPED/.
Thank you for your attention to this critical work and for our shared commitment to serving and supporting students in the state of Texas.
See Texas Part B Monitoring Visit Letter, supra,, pages 10-12.

References: §300
 §300
 §29
 §89
 §300
 §300
 §300
 §300
 §300