Source: http://dphilpotlaw.com/laws/
Timestamp: 2018-08-22 07:44:47
Document Index: 406676599

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 25', '§ 25', '§ 25', '§ 25', '§ 37', '§ 25', '§ 504', '§ 504', '§300', '§300']

Laws | Dorene J. Philpot Attorney At Law | Special Education Lawyer Houston Texas, Beaumont Texas, Austin Texas, Indianapolis Indiana
Indiana's statute on this:
511 IAC 7-38-2 Procedures for amending educational records
Sec. 2. (a) A parent or student of legal age who believes that information in an educational record collected, maintained, or used under this rule is inaccurate, misleading, or violates the privacy or other rights of the student may request the public agency that maintains the record to amend the information.
(3) specify the information that the parent or student of legal age believes:
(b) If the public agency agrees to amend the information as requested, the public agency must do the following:
(1) Amend the information within ten (10) business days after the request is received.
(2) Notify the parent or student of legal age, in writing, that the change has been made, including the date the change was made.
(c) If the public agency refuses to amend the information as requested, the public agency must notify the parent or student of legal age of the refusal, in writing, within ten (10) business days after the request is received. The written notice must include a statement of the right of the parent or student of legal age to a hearing to challenge the information in the student's educational record and the procedures for the hearing, including the following:
(1) The parent or student of legal age must submit to the public agency a written request for a hearing, specifying the:
(2) The public agency must do the following:
(A) Convene a hearing within fifteen (15) business days after the request for the hearing is received.
(B) Notify the parent or student of legal age, in writing, of the hearing:
(ii) time; and
not less than five (5) business days in advance of the hearing.
(3) The hearing may be conducted by any person, including an official of the public agency, who does not have a direct interest in the outcome of the hearing.
(4) The parent or student of legal age:
(A) must be given a full and fair opportunity to present evidence relevant to the issues; and
(B) may, at their own expense, be assisted or represented by one (1) or more persons, including an attorney.
(5) The hearing officer must notify the parent or student of legal age of the hearing decision in writing within ten (10) business days after the hearing. The decision must:
(A) be based solely on evidence and testimony presented at the hearing; and
(6) If the hearing officer determines the information in question is inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise in violation of the privacy or other rights of the student, the public agency must:
(A) amend the information accordingly; and
(B) inform the parent or student of legal age in writing of the amendment.
(7) If the hearing officer determines the information in question is not inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise in violation of the privacy or other rights of the student, the public agency must inform the parent or student of legal age in writing of the right to place a statement in the student's record commenting on the contested information or stating the reasons for disagreeing with the decision, or both.
(8) A statement placed in the record by the parent or student of legal age under subdivision (7) must be maintained by the public agency in the student's record as long as the record or the contested portion of the record is maintained by the public agency. The public agency must disclose the statement whenever it discloses the record or the contested portion of the record to which the statement relates.
Texas Education Code § 25.085(a) requires that a child attend school each day for the entire period that a school’s program of instruction is provided. Attendance is compulsory for a child at least six years of age, or who is younger than six and has been previously enrolled in first grade, and who has not yet reached age 18.14 Throughout this article, this provision is referred to as the compulsory attendance law. The Education and Family Codes contain “truancy” laws to enforce this compulsory attendance requirement.
The 76th Legislature expanded Education Code § 25.085(d) by adding accelerated reading, accelerated instruction, and basic skills programs to the compulsory school attendance requirement. Extended year programs and tutorial classes had already been incorporated into compulsory school attendance under the previous version of § 25.085(d). Thus, students who are required to attend any of those accelerated or compensatory programs are subject to the compulsory attendance laws for those programs the same as they are for a regular school day.
The 76th Legislature also revised Education Code § 25.085 to provide that a student who voluntarily enrolls in school or voluntarily attends school after his 18th birthday is required to attend school each day for the entire period the program of instruction is offered. The student’s enrollment may be revoked for the remainder of the school year if the student has more than five unexcused absences in a semester. Once a student’s enrollment is revoked, the student may be considered an unauthorized person on school grounds for trespass purposes as per Education Code § 37.107.
School districts also may apply Education Code § 25.085(e) to special education students over age 18. While the district must make FAPE available to the student, nothing prevents the school district from applying a neutral administrative rule to that special education student if he or she has more than five unexcused absences in a semester. However, before the school district revokes the special education student’s enrollment, the district should conduct a manifestation determination to rule out any connection between the student’s disability and the absences (i.e. any chance that the absences are a manifestation of the student’s disability).
Special Considerations for the Absent Special Education Student
When a special education student compiles excessive absences, some special precautions should be taken into account. Is it possible that the absences are related to the student’s disability? If so, is there anything the school can do to reduce those absences? Before a school district takes action against a special education student for excessive absences, the ARD committee/IEP team should consider these questions.
There are cases in which Texas hearing officers have ruled against school districts because the district failed to present the issues to the ARD committee. For example, in David A. v. El Paso I.S.D., the hearing officer concluded that the district failed to provide the student with an appropriate education and ordered the school to reimburse the parent for private tuition. The school argued that David’s lack of progress was due to nonattendance. The hearing officer ruled that the district should have held an ARD meeting to determine if the absences were related to the student’s disability.
Prior to initiating compulsory attendance complaints or revoking course credit due to excessive absences, it is advisable to hold an ARD to address these issues. If there is a connection between the disability and the absences, the district should address the problem through behavior strategies and supports for the student. When there is no connection, the district is in a better position to follow through with its proposed action.
If I am successful with my Section 504 case, am I entitled to seek attorney fees?
Yes, under 29 USC 791a(b): which states "(b) In any action or proceeding to enforce or charge a violation of a provision of this subchapter, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs."
State Contacts for the No Child Left Behind Act
Important Policy Letters from the Secretary of Education
Letter About Adequate Yearly Progress & School Improvement Options
Using the No Child Left Behind Act to Improve Schools in Your State - A Toolkit for Business Leaders
- Information Resources for Business Leadership to Increase Student Achievement under the "No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, published by the Business Roundtable
No State Left Behind: The Challenges and Opportunities of ESEA 2001 by the Education Commission of the States.
Click on No State Left Behind to download the PDF publication
Major Changes to ESEA in the No Child Left Behind Act by Learning First Alliance
Congress adds Title VI to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, creating a Bureau of Education for the Handicapped (now called OSEP) and creating and funding what is now called the Comprehensive System of Personnel Development, by which school districts can acquire and disseminate promising educational practices to teach students with disabilities. Reed was legislative assistant to Senator Yarborough who chaired the education committee at that time
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is enacted into statute, and affects any recipient of federal financial assistance such as your school district and your state education agency.
The EHA (Education of the Handicapped Act -- grandparent of IDEA) is enacted to greatly expand Title VI.
FERPA (The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) is enacted, allowing parents to have access to all personally identifiable information collected, maintained or used by your school district in regard to your child.
The EHA is amended by the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) which is the parent of the IDEA).
Before 1975, children with disabilities were denied an education solely on the basis of their disabilities. Two court cases, PARC v. Pennsylvania (1972) and Mills v. D.C. Board of Education (1972), creatively used the precedent of Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) to apply the equal protection argument to students with disabilities. PARC and Mills legitimatized Congressional action in 1975.
Sec. 504 regulations are issued, to begin with 1977-78 school year, and includes a requirement for a self-evaluation of all policies and procedures of your school district and your state education agency so that discriminatory policies would be stopped. (Congress notes in 1990 hearings that school districts illegally ignored this requirement).
Appendix A to Section 504, which explains the Sec. 504 regulations, is issued.
The EAHCA regulations are issued to begin with the 1977-78 school year.
The EAHCA Appendix C is issued with 60 Q&A's about the IEP process (this is considered part of the federal law by federal courts but has been largely ignored by most school districts).
The EAHCA is amended with the addition of the Handicapped Children's Protection Act (in which Congress overturns a Supreme Court decision that said the EAHCA was "an exclusive remedy" and that parents could not also use Section 504 to protect their child). The amendment makes clear that students and parents have rights under the IDEA and Section 504 at the same time.
The Americans with Disabilities Act is enacted. Congress finds that the failures of school districts over the past 15 years of special education laws requires them to add the protection of the ADA to parents and students with disabilities. The ADA also adopts the Section 504 regulations as part of the ADA statute, so now the 504 regulations have the full weight of a federal statute.
The EAHCA is amended and is now called the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), adding transition as a requirement.
The "Joint Policy Memorandum" from the U.S. Department of Education is issued, at the specific request of Congress, to explain what must be made available to your child under Section 504 in a regular classroom (the memo is on our website).
The IDEA is amended with hundreds of changes that affect programming starting with the 1998-99 school year.
The new IDEA Regulations are issued with many changes.
The IDEA old Appendix C has been mostly included in the amendments to the IDEA statute so a new Appendix (now called Appendix A) is issued with 40 new Q&A's about the IEP process. The IDEA App. A is not to be confused with the Sec. 504 App A which was issued in 1977.
Public Law print of PL 107-110, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001No Child Left Behind Resources
President Bush signed into law on Dec. 3, 2004, changes to Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEIA 2004). The changes became effective July 1, 2005.
Many causes of action (laws saying who can sue for what) have statutes of limitations, i.e., you must sue within a specified time after the event occurred (or should have occurred, but did not). Often these are tolled (or put off/postponed) because the person who really owns the cause of action (i.e., the victim) is either under 18 or is suffering from some recognized infirmity such that s/he was unable to commence suit within the statutory timeframe.
In many areas of law, such as child support and medical malpractice, children are allowed to sue after reaching the age of majority.
However, despite this right in other areas of law, Texas has imposed a one-year statute of limitations in IDEA matters. This means that although a student is operating under a “double” disability (minority and the disabling condition), Texas believes that kids should only be able to seek redress for violations of their legal rights in special education for a one-year period.
Although there are “exceptions” to the one-year statute of limitations exist through the federal law IDEA, in the vast majority of cases Texas hearing officers currently are presenting a united front in finding that the child’s/family’s case just about never meets the requirements of any of the exceptions.
Why are Texas kids entitled to less than what other children in most of the rest of the nation receive? Are our children worth less here?
This clearly needs to be changed legislatively. You are urged to contact your legislators to ask them to sponsor a bill to at least apply a two-year statute of limitations, which is the limitations period that most other states have.
US Department of Education Issues Final IDEA 2004 Regulations
In November 2004, the Congress enacted major changes in the IDEA, effective July 1, 2005. Whenever federal law is changed, the federal department responsible for implementing the law must enact regulations that help to explain and interpret the law. The US Department of Education has been working on the proposed regulations for two years. On August 14, the Department released the final regulations. For the most part, the regulations track the actual language of the law. However, there are several important changes, both in comparison to the law and to the draft proposed regulations that were issued earlier. For a copy of the regulations, go to the USDOE Office of Special Education website: http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/idea2004.html#regulations.
Note that the regulations and the supporting documents are more than 1700 pages. The regulations alone, without narrative and interpretation are 307 pages. They can be obtained from the National Information Center for Handicapped Children and Youth (NICHCY) at:
The Department of Education's Summary of the changes can be found at:
A book comparing the old and new IDEA regulations has been published by the National Association of State Directors of Special Education and can be purchased for $15 from their website at:
If you are interested in a summary of the regulations, USDOE has a fact sheet which can be downloaded:
http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/speced/ideafactsheet.html
Some key highlights of the new regulations are:
• Adds Tourette Syndrome to the list of covered conditions within the Other Health Impaired Category (Sec. 300.8(c)(9)(i))
• Changes the new Specific Learning Disability (SLD) criteria to provide that the child be determined eligible if the child is not achieving adequately in relation to the child's age or in relation to state standards, if the child has received "appropriate" (replacing the reference to "research based") instruction (Sec. 309(a and b)). This appears to be a compromise blending some variation of the old discrepancy formula with provision of regular ed instruction to rule out inadequate instruction as the cause of the child's delay
• Clarifies that there are no limits to the related services for which a child with a cochlear implant is eligible (Sec. 300.34(b)(2))
• Reinforces that the provision of supplementary aides, supports and services to children receiving special education should include services necessary for the child to participate in extracurricular and non-academic activities (Sec. 300.42)
• Provides that a child is entitled to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) even if the child is receiving passing grades, progressing from year to year, or has not been retained from progressing to the next grade level (Sec. 300.101(c))
• Appears to mandate lack of response to regular education research-based intervention as a prerequisite for determination that a child has a learning disability (Sec. 300.309)
• States that parent consent must be obtained before school staff may observe a child for purposes of evaluation (Sec. 300.310(b))
• Requires all staff, including teachers, related services personnel, and paraprofessionals, to be advised of their responsibilities in relation to each child's IEP (Sec. 300.323(d))
• Requires that the IEP team be informed of any informal changes agreed to between a member of the staff and the parent (Sec. 300.324(a)(4))
• Provides for appointment of the parent as representative for a child who has turned 18 and is unable to make decisions for themselves but has not been determined incompetent (Sec. 300.520 (b))
• Provides that if the IEP team determines that a child's behavior is directly caused by the school's failure to appropriately implement the IEP, the failure must be rectified by the school district (Sec. 300.530(e)(3))
• Provides that in determining whether a child's placement is being changed due to a series of short-term suspensions, each of which is less than 10 days, but which total more than 10 days, the school staff will decide if the different incidents reflect a "pattern of behavior," which would trigger stay put safeguards, subject to the right of the parent to challenge the determination in a due process proceeding (Sec. 300.536(b)) Previously, there was no direction as to how the decision about whether there was a pattern of behavior should be made.
• Provides for the State Education Agency to enforce written settlement agreements under some circumstances (Sec. 300.510(d)(2))
Under § 504, a student who (a) has, (b) has a record of having, or (c) is regarded as having, a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits a major life activity such as learning, self-care, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, working and performing manual tasks is eligible for Section 504 protections.
A Section 504 hearing creates the record for federal court. Section 504 cases can go to a jury and bring damages. Section 504 hearings are administrative hearings and thus the strict rules of evidence don’t apply unless there is some specific statutory requirement that they do. In Section 504 cases, you can demand and use class-wide data.
Request mediation, an impartial hearing, and an appeal of any decisions or actions taken by the school corporation regarding your child’s identification, evaluation, educational program or placement. You and your student may take part in these proceedings and have an attorney represent you. Requests for due process must be made to the superintendent of the Section 504 coordinator. The following details the procedures:
If the parent/guardian disagrees with the identification, evaluation, educational placement, or with the provisions of a free appropriate public education for his/her child. The parent/guardian may make a written request for a hearing to the superintendent, indicating the specific reason(s) for the request.
The School Corporation may initiate a hearing regarding the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the student or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the student. The School Corporation shall notify the parent/guardian of the specific reason(s) for the request.
Such hearings shall be conducted within twenty (20) instructional days after the request is received, unless the hearing officer grants an extension and at a time and place reasonably convenient to the parent/guardian. Upon receipt of a request for a hearing officer. The parent/guardian involved in a hearing shall be given the right to have the child who is the subject of the hearing present, open the hearing to the public, and be represented by counsel or any other representative.
During the pendency of an administrative or judicial proceeding, unless the School Corporation and the parent/guardian of the child agree otherwise, the child involved in the proceeding shall remain in his/her present educational placement. If there is a dispute regarding this present placement, the hearing officer shall order an interim placement. The present educational placement of the child shall include normal grade advancement if the proceedings extend beyond the end of the school year. If the issues involve an application to initial admission to school, the child, with the consent of the parent/guardian, shall be placed in the school until the completion of the proceedings. In the absence of an agreement, the hearing officer shall determine the child’s placement during the proceedings.
The child and the parent/guardian shall have the right to legal counsel and/or other representation of their own choosing. The School Corporation shall inform the parent/guardian of any free or low-cost legal services available in the area if the parent guardian requests the information or if the School Corporation initiates a hearing. The School Corporation shall bear the burden of proof as to the appropriateness of any placement, transfer, or the denial of same.
A tape recording or other verbatim record of the hearing shall be made and transcribed and upon request shall be made available to the parent/guardian or representative, at the school corporation’s expense. At a reasonable time prior to the hearing during school hours, the parent/guardian or representative shall be given access to all records of the school corporation, and any of its agents or employees, pertaining to the child, including all tests and reports upon which the proposed action may be based. The parent/guardian or representative shall have the right to compel the attendance, to confront or to cross-examine any witness who may have evidence upon the proposed action may be based. The parent/guardian or representative and School Corporation shall have the right to present evidence and testimony, including expert medical, psychological, or educational testimony. Introduction of any evidence at the hearing that has not been disclosed to both parties at least five (5) days before the hearing is prohibited, subject to the discretion of the hearing officer.
A petition to review (appeal) the decision of the hearing officer may be made by any party to the hearing. The request must be in writing, filed with the superintendent and the opposing party be specific as to the objections, and be filed within twenty (20) instructional days of the date the hearing officer’s decision is received. The School Corporation is responsible for the appointment of an independent appeals officer to conduct an impartial review of the record as a whole and may, at his/her election, conduct the review with or without oral argument. Such review shall be conducted within twenty (20) instructional days of the receipt of the petition to review, unless either party requests an extension of time.
The appeals officer shall insure that a transcript of the review is prepared and made available to any party upon request.
Ask for payment of reasonable attorney fees if you are successful on your claims.
The student’s most recent IEP or 504 plan.
The student’s most recent evaluation. It is important that this evaluation utilize testing instruments that the college or university accepts. Most do NOT accept screening tests, such as the K-BIT and the WRAT.
Some colleges and universities require that the evaluation include:
A specific rationale for any necessary accommodations.
Specific evaluator qualification.
A 504 plan often is the "consolation prize" when a child with a disability, which adversely affects educational performance, should have been found eligible for services under IDEA, but for economic, staffing and other unknown reasons was found ineligible and was given a 504 plan instead. A child with a disability is eligible for 504 protections.
A child with a disability that does NOT adversely affect educational performance is eligible for 504 protections but is NOT eligible for an IEP.
A child with a disability that does adversely affect educational performance is eligible for 504 protections and is eligible for an IEP.
A special education child receiving educational benefit under IDEA with an IEP is also a child with a disability under 504.
If a 504 child has a 504 plan with various educational accommodations, and then becomes eligible for a special education program under IDEA and an IEP, that child is STILL entitled to the same 504 protections and educational accommodations but there is no reason to continue with the 504 plan because the accommodations should be written into the IEP.
504 does not require plans to be written, though local school district policy might.
The parents have very few rights under 504.
The parent does not have to be invited to the meeting where a 504 plan is developed. The school must only notify the parent that a 504 plan was developed.
There are fewer procedural requirements that serve to protect the parent and child under 504.
What looks like discrimination may really not be discrimination.
504 does follow the child after he/she leaves the public school system. IDEA does not.
Section 504 Q&A
How time much is enough information to document that a student has a disability for purposes of providing a 504 plan to a student?
The amount of information required is determined by the multi-disciplinary committee gathered to evaluate the student. The committee should include persons knowledgeable about the student, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the placement options.
The committee members must determine whether they have enough information to make a knowledgeable decision as to whether or not the student has a disability. The Section 504 regulation, at 34 C.F.R. 104.35(c), requires that school districts draw from a variety of sources in the evaluation process so that the possibility of error is minimized.
The information obtained from all such sources must be documented and all significant factors related to the student's learning process must be considered. These sources and factors may include aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, physical condition, social and cultural background, and adaptive behavior.
In evaluating a student suspected of having a disability, it is unacceptable to rely on presumptions and stereotypes regarding persons with disabilities or classes of such persons. Compliance with the IDEA regarding the group of persons present when an evaluation or placement decision is made is satisfactory under Section 504.
No. A physician's medical diagnosis may be considered among other sources in evaluating a student with a disability or believed to have a disability that substantially limits a major life activity. Other sources to be considered, along with the medical diagnosis, include aptitude and achievement tests, teacher recommendations, physical condition, social and cultural background, and adaptive behavior.
The eligibility decision must be based on information from a variety of sources, such as teacher reports, reports of physical or mental condition, observations, adaptive behavior, and aptitude and
If we do the modifications for the student, do we have to refer the child and go through the procedural hassle of 504?
Yes. If the student qualifies for 504, doing the modifications without providing the procedural protections is a violation. That was the case where a school district provided a student who had undergone hip surgery with appropriate modifications, but failed to have procedures in place to document the deliberation of, or provision of accommodations [the regulations require no such documentation], or to inform parents of the procedure to follow should their student become disabled. Temple (TX) ISD, 25 IDELR 232 (OCR 1996). There can be few results as unpalatable as one where the district provides sufficient modifications to a qualified disabled student, but nevertheless is found in violation for not jumping through the procedural hoops.
What is a 504 reevaluation?
Unlike its special education counterpart, the 504 re-evaluation does not mean "test," but instead, means a gathering of data from a variety of sources. No formal testing is necessary. Letter to Williams, 21 IDELR 73 (OCR 1994). In the § 504 context, evaluation refers to a gathering of data or information from a variety of sources so that the committee can make the required determinations. Since specific or highly technical eligibility criteria are not part of the 504 regulations, common sources of evaluation data for 504 eligibility are the student's grades, disciplinary referrals, health information, language surveys, parent information, standardized test scores, teacher comments, etc. An evaluation is required, according to the regulations at 104.35(a), prior to initial evaluation, and prior to any significant change of placement. A reevaluation is also required "periodically" which the Appendix to the regulations defines as at least every three years.
The reevaluation is simply a re-gathering of information from a variety of sources to verify eligibility and to determine if additional changes are needed in the child's program. While the regulations require reevaluation every three years, the better practice is to conduct one at least at the end of every school year, looking forward to the next school year and changes to the child's schedule, teachers, and other issues that may require tinkering with the modifications and/or behavior management plan. Note that the manifestation determination meeting conducted by the 504 committee prior to a change of placement for disciplinary reasons of greater that 10 days, or when removals total 10 days during a school year is also a reevaluation.
Can a student's absences trigger a 504 referral and evaluation?
Absolutely. If a district suspects that a significant number of absences is due to a disability that substantially limits a major life activity (for example, when the number of absences threatens the student's ability to receive credit for coursework or when it impacts significantly on grades), the district ought to refer and evaluate. For example, a junior high school student with severe allergies, asthma, and migraine headaches had a lengthy history of missing school due to her medical problems. In seventh grade, she was absent 132 times, and in eighth grade attended classes only three to ten times from September to November. The parents argue that the school failed to accommodate the student's absences. The only evaluations conducted by the district with respect to the child's absences were very recent attempts to find psychological causes, even though the district was aware for the past five years of the student's medical problems (the allergies, headaches, and asthma). OCR finds that the district failed to properly evaluate given the information that it had on the medical related absences. Grafton (ND) Public School, 20 IDELR 82 (OCR 1993).
What's all the hoopla over the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines on diagnosis of ADHD?
An ongoing struggle for many educators is the realization that no medical diagnosis is required for 504 eligibility. "Section 504 does not require that a school district conduct a medical assessment of a student who has or is suspected of having ADHD unless the district determines it is necessary in order to determine if the student has a disability." Williamson County (TN) School District, 32 IDELR 261 (OCR 2000). In fact, the regulations do not require medical evaluations for any disability to qualify under 504. Of course, if the parents present the school with an outside medical evaluation, it must be considered as part of the district's evaluation process. This requirement has also been a concern to some educators, especially when the diagnostic practices of a local doctor result in a high number of ADD/ADHD students. Some relief arrived on that front last year.
If I want to file a complaint about Section 504 violations with a government agency, which agency would that be?
U.S. Office for Civil Rights, Dallas Office
Affirmative duty to identify children with special needs
Under both federal and state law, schools must evaluate and identify children suspected of having disabilities, even if the parents do not first ask for special education testing or services.
Currently, Indiana’s law is written to mirror the OLD Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), so until it is rewritten children have protections under BOTH laws.
Schools have an affirmative duty to perform evaluations of children who may possibly have special needs and may require special education and related services of children ages 3 through 22. This is something they are supposed to notice on their own, though much of the time, it’s the parents who realize that there’s something wrong and who ask for evaluations. (511 IAC 7-25-2). This includes students who are in public and private schools, agencies and institutions.
Possible areas of Eligibility for Special Education and Related Services
Autism spectrum, communication disorder, deaf-blind, developmental delay (early childhood), emotional disability, hearing impairment, learning disability, mental disability, multiple disabilities, orthopedic impairment, other health impairment (sometimes called a catch-all category), traumatic brain injury, visual impairment.
Sometimes a student with have more than one area of eligibility. Although for the most part schools will accurately identify a student’s area of eligibility, sometimes parents want one label over another. Generally, that is not an issue that the parents have a legal mechanism to force upon the school. And caselaw indicates that the label matters less than whether the services provided were appropriate, which makes sense in most cases.
**Students who have not yet been identified as being eligible for special education and related services are STILL covered by the state and federal protections if they SHOULD have been identified but have not been identified.**
This seems to come up most often in discipline cases.
The IDEIA (federal law) states: §300.527 Protections for children not yet eligible for special education and related services. (a) General. A child who has not been determined to be eligible for special education and related services under this part and who has engaged in behavior that violated any rule or code of conduct of the local educational agency, including any behavior described in §§300.520 or 300.521, may assert any of the protections provided for in this part if the LEA had knowledge (as determined in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section) that the child was a child with a disability before the behavior that precipitated the disciplinary action occurred.
If the school evaluates the student and the school believes the student doesn’t qualify for special education and related services but the parent does believe the student should qualify, the parent can write a letter, stating that she disagrees with the school’s evaluation and ask for an independent educational evaluation (IEE) to be paid for by the school. In response, the school is required to give one of two answers: One is to agree to pay for an independent evaluation by a practitioner of the parent’s choice (as long as the person is qualified to actually DO a psychoeducational evaluation) OR the school is required to file for a due process hearing to have a hearing officer rule that the evaluation done by the school was appropriate and that an independent educational evaluation is not necessary.
However, as a practical matter, because an IEE is much less expensive than a hearing, most schools will agree to pay for the independent educational evaluation.
Then after the child has been deemed eligible, a reevaluation must be conducted every three years, unless both the school and parents waive that right, in writing.
After eligibility is determined, committee devises educational plan
Once everyone agrees that a child needs special education and related services in order to make meaningful educational progress, then a group of individuals, including school employees and the parents, sit down together and write an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for the student.
This IEP will govern the services that the student receives.
There is no formula, or at least there is not supposed to be, for what students in specific categories get. In other words, all students with autism are not given the same program, even though they have the same disability. Some need services that others don’t, and some need more intensive services than others.
The IEP is supposed to be written with the child’s individual needs in mind.
The IEP should contain the following
A statement of the student’s present levels of performance in academic, physical, social, behavioral areas.
Specific measurable goals and objectives for the student in all areas of need, such as academic, speech, behavioral, social skills, life skills, for example.
A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aides and services to be provided to the student.
A statement about whether the student will participate in standardized statewide testing or other measures.
The date of initiation of services, length, frequency and duration of services.
A statement about whether the student will participate in extracurriculars.
A statement of how the student’s progress (or lack thereof) will be measured.
Whether the student needs Extended School Year (ESY) services. (These are services during school breaks, like summers, holiday breaks)
A statement of transition services (life after school).
A statement of what the student’s least-restrictive environment is. An example of a very restrictive placement would be a residential setting. An example of a less restrictive placement would be a general education classroom. The LRE is supposed to be determined on a child-by-child basis. It’s not a room, but a placement that works for the student.
A statement of transfer of rights to the student once he turns 18. (If the student is not competent to make decision about his educational services, then the parents should seek a guardianship so that they can continue to advocate for their child’s rights after age 18 because the student could be eligible for services through age 22.)
A statement of accommodations and modifications necessary for the student. Examples could include more time on tests, use of a calculator, fewer questions on tests, typing answers instead of handwriting them, having tests read to them and answering aloud, rather than in writing. There are hundreds of examples; these are just a few.
If a student needs related services in order to make meaningful educational progress, then those services should be included in the student’s IEP. Example of related services are: audiological services, counseling, early identification and assessment, medical services for evaluation, occupational therapy, orientation and mobility services, parent training and counseling, physical therapy, psychological services, recreation, rehabilitation counseling, school health services, social work services in schools, transportation, other supportive services.
Implementation of the student’s IEP
The school is required to implement the student’s IEP, as written. The student’s Teacher of Record (TOR) is the one who is responsible for seeing to it that the IEP is implemented.
It is illegal for a teacher to say: “I do not agree with this IEP, and I’m not going to do what it says.” If a teacher disagrees with an IEP and believes it’s inappropriate, he can also request a case conference committee meeting for the purposes of revising the student’s IEP. In fact, if the school employee believes that it needs to be changed, the school would have a duty to reconvene.
The same is true for the parent. Although the IEP is required to be revised at LEAST annually, if at any time during the school year the parent believes that the IEP needs to be revised, she can request that the case conference committee reconvene and revise the student’s IEP. The school must convene the case conference committee upon parental request.
Parental Absence/Incompetence
Under the old federal law and the current state law, the school couldn’t test a student for eligibility for special education and related services unless written parental permission was given . (Sometimes this is a problem for a parent who doesn’t want her child to be labeled as having special needs, thinking it was more appropriate not to receive services than to possibly be stigmatized by his peers and teachers.)
The school is required to maintain a system to assign educational surrogate parents who has no conflict of interest and who will be charged with working to ensure that the student receives a free appropriate public education.
Mechanisms to Resolve Disputes
Case conferences. This is a committee consisting of several individuals from the school and the parent(s). If it’s the student’s first case conference or it’s a case conference held after the conducting of a psychoeducational evaluation by the school, then the school psychologist must attend.
Mediation is something the school is required to tell the parent about when the parent requests a hearing, though a school is not required to participate in a mediation just because a parent wants to, and vice versa.
With a mediation, the parent and school would sign an agreement to seek a mediation on a form devised by the Indiana Department of Education. The DOE would choose a mediator for the process, and it works much like mediation in other areas of law, though attorneys on both sides are strongly discouraged by the Indiana Department of Education from attending these special education mediations. The school picks up the cost of the mediator’s fee.
BSEA, federal or state court
After the IHO renders a decision, either party may appeal that decision to the Board of Special Education Appeals (BSEA) within 30 days, unless a request for an extension of time is granted. Then the opposing party has 10 days to respond, unless an extension is granted.
BSEA decisions are posted online at http://ideanet.doe.state.in.us/legal/appeals.html.
A student with a disability may be suspended for up to 10 consecutive school days for misconduct. The school doesn’t have to provide any educational services during the first 10 days of suspension in a school year. The school may suspend a student for up to 10 consecutive school days for each separate incident of misconduct. However, when the number of days of suspension in a school year reaches the 11th day, the school must provide educational services to the student and must convene a case conference committee meeting within 10 business days of the 11th day of suspension to develop a plan for an assessment of the students behavior and review and/or revise the student’s existing behavior plan.
A student with a disability may be expelled. However, before an expulsion can occur, the school must notify the parent of the decision on the day the decision is made, provide the parents with a copy of their notice of rights, convent a case conference committee within 10 school days of the decision to expel the student and conduct a manifestation determination.
What communities can be doing
Setting up and implementing strong advocates system
Courts should rely more on schools to provide the services that they’re already required to provide, rather than using the courts as the student’s “behavior intervention plan.”
Support public defender agency’s endeavors to set up a program to help parents of special needs kiddos to ensure federal and state rights are enforced.
Sometimes families with disabled children are entitled to Social Security benefits, in addition to school-related services. For more information about this, please visit the following websites:
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.04/handbook-0415.html
http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/handbook/handbook.21/handbook-2112.html
Other sources: Contact your local Social Security office or a local attorney or agency familiar with Social Security claims.
• Make sure the school offers special education aimed at helping the student overcome a diagnosed handicap. The school should have staff available to design a curriculum aimed at your child’s particular handicap, and that should by why the child attends that school.
• Get the school to write a statement about it’s program
• Remember that as a legitimate medical expense, it’s still not deductible until exceeds 7.5 percent of your adjusted gross income. Given the cost of most private schools today, that won’t be a problem.
This information is not intended to be tax advice. You should consult with your own tax professional to see how the above might apply to your case.
To learn more about Texas special education law, visit the official Texas State Education Agency website at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/special.ed.
To see the Texas parent resource guide, visit http://www.tea.state.tx.us/special.ed/resources/
To see the link to the Texas state education agency website, go to http://www.tea.state.tx.us/educationlaw.html
The Arc of Texas is an organization whose purpose is "creating opportunities for people with mental retardation and other developmental disabilities to be included in their communities."
Its link is: http://www.thearcoftexas.org/resources/families/inclusionresources.asp