Presentation on theme: "IDEA Updates, Current Legislative Action, & Advocacy Dr. Lynn R. Zubov Winston-Salem State University NC-CEC CAN Coordinator September 2007 NC CEC Western."— Presentation transcript:
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
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 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
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 pre- determined 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 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: click on Policy & Adocacy, and than Legislative Action Center and enter your zip code