Carolyn Rowlett

Wanted to add to my answer as I did a little more digging. Some things to know when you're talking about a "properly certified staff member." First, due to nationwide staffing issue, many states have PIP's (Provisional Intern Permits) which allows uncredentialed staff members to be the responsible teacher for a spec ed classroom, the co-teacher in a collaborate classroom setting, or even a case manager. What you want to focus on (and obtain information regarding) is whether or not the staff person providing the specialized instruction is sufficiently trained in how to do it AND is providing the instruction with fidelity.

As you correctly stated, the attendance record of the spec ed teacher would not be considered an educational record of your child; therefore, you would not be entitled to that under FERPA, even though it potentially speaks to whether or not you child has received FAPE. There might be other laws under which you could request this information, such as your state's Sunshine Law. However, that is a long, involved process and not receiving FAPE is something you would want to address immediately. My suggestion would be to first, reach out (casually - no "threats" yet) and ask what the procedure is when the spec ed teacher is not at school on a particular day when your child is to receive spec ed services; specifically, does s/he still receive specialized instruction? If so, who provides that? (Also ask for that person's title so that you can look up on your state DOE's website to see what certification is required for that title/position. ) If s/he does not receive his/her specialized instruction on the days the spec ed teacher is absent, ask what the procedure is for making up those minutes. If the above does not get you anywhere, then you can ask for documentation of the minutes your child has received. If the school refuses that, file a state complaint alleging the procedural violation of not following the IEP document due to 1) failure to provide FAPE because they won't provide documentation of minutes and therefore, the assumption has to be that the minutes were not provided and 2) prohibiting parent participation by failing to communicate and answer questions regarding the provision of minutes.

Wow. For a second there, I thought one of my clients had hired an additional advocate, because this is so eerily similar to a situation I have! 1. You don't have to wait for "the next IEP" to get more specific language inserted. An IEP document is fluid and can be amended at any time. Ghost write and then have your client send the team an email as to how you want the language changed. It can be done without a meeting, but I'm guessing that won't happen in this case. lf they refuse, ask for a meeting to discuss the requested change. If they refuse during the meeting, request that a PWN be sent documenting this refusal. If a PWN isn't sent (or isn't sufficient), send an email requesting a new one and the reasons why it is insufficient. (They may refuse this, as well, but at least you now have in documented in YOUR email.) 2. I don't know what state you're in, but most IEP documents (in addition to the Goals section) will have a specific "box" for number of minutes, as well as location (which should be stated as "in the special education setting"), which should cover your concerns in that area. However, I agree that you should also make sure the goal states "special education setting" rather than "outside general education." 3. As far as documentation of minutes, I'll address the "easy" issue first. Being pulled out for testing does NOT count as instruction time. Period. And not having time to do both is not an excuse for not providing instruction required under the IEP - and your state DOE would agree. Call the compliance division for your state's special education department within the DOE and ask. Then you can tell the school district that it's not just you stating this - the state agrees with you. Staffing is tough these days, but have they tried to hire another spec ed teacher? Have they looked into contracting out the services? A few weeks of missed instruction might be excused due to staffing issues, but certainly not beyond that. And even then your client would be entitled to comp minutes. 4. As far as documentation of minutes overall, YES, the school district MUST be doing this! How else can they prove they are providing FAPE? How else can they prove that compensatory minutes are not owed? If a state complaint were filed asserting failure to provide minutes, the state would request an accounting of minutes provided. My suggestion would be to send a final email requesting documentation of the minutes and that if not received, they have given you no choice but to file a state complaint. Then do it.

What is the school using to determine he's on "grade level." My guess is that it is something like grades or standardized testing that doesn't rise to the level of a proper evaluation. But the neuropsych eval should have included academic testing and provided data to determine eligibility. Did you have a Review of Existing Data meeting or Eligibility Meeting after this evaluation was received by the school district? They should have held a meeting to go over the results with you. Even though it was done by an outside evaluator, it's basically their report. If they didn't hold a meeting, you need to reach out and request one to see if the data in the neuropsych report is enough to meet the eligibility criteria in your state (make them show you the eligibility criteria during the meeting and how the data in the report either does or does not meet it; better yet, look it up before the meeting so you're informed on your state's criteria or call your Department of Education and ask for it). After the meeting, if the team determines no eligibility, make sure you get a Prior Written Notice to that effect with reasons why. Getting a report regarding dysgraphia and dyslexia diagnoses may be on you because that isn't really necessary. It's not about the actual diagnosis - that is not what determines eligibility. It's about the data and present levels irrespective of diagnosis. I would think the neuropsych eval would have covered that. If not or if you disagree, request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE). That you would NOT have to pay for unless the school district decides to take you to due process to prove they should not have to provide one (which rarely ever happens). Having said all that, it never hurts to ask...

Hi. I do advocacy in Kansas. I give a free hour consultation if you'd like to call me. (Too much to get into here, and too many facts unknown.) But in short, JSD24 is correct. Carolyn Rowlett (816-547-5467)

First, what is your daughter's disability? If they're blaming low test scores on her "not putting in enough effort," are they taking into account her disability? Is is ADHD? They need to drill down to determine if her supposed "not putting in enough effort" is related to a disability and if so, need to address ways to support this disability so that she can put in the effort. I don't think you're at the point of asking for a para yet in that it first needs to be determined that accommodations and specialized instruction are not enough. (Although I do realized that you've tried to get these to no avail. But the reality is if they're not providing those, there is no way you are going to get a para. So the approach is to keep fighting for the accommodations and specialized instruction, if need can be shown.) In my opinion, Title I has nothing to do with whether or not a child qualifies for accommodations and specialized instruction under the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). I am not familiar with the requirements necessary to receive Title I support, but it may be a lower bar than the IDEA which would be a reason why in some cases a students might receive Title I support, but not special education services. However, that does not appear to be the case with your daughter. The IEP is all about data. So get the data. Her grades and test scores indicate that there is concern in the area of academics. Reach out to the school and ask for an evaluation in the area of academics and any other area you have concerns in - anything listed in the neuropsych report (executive functioning, etc.). If you don't like their results or they still refuse to provide accommodations, ask for an IEE (Independent Educational Evaluation) - one that can dig down to the underlying cause of her struggles and make specific recommendations as to accommodations. Maybe the accommodations needed are not specifically for math but for executive functioning? No, she does not need to fail for a certain before asking for help again. But you do need to have the data. If you get the data and the school district still refuse to help your daughter, you may need to hire an advocate or reach out to a state agency that provide no or low cost advocates. Those might be listed on your state's department of education website.

The box needs to be checked.

You do need to check the "I agree" box for them to move forward. Your note covers that you don't agree with everything.

Everything is driven by data - so yes, you need to request testing. I would also request a FBA that can lead to a BIP that includes more than just "work completion." Data (present levels) then determines goals. You can't change goals until you know what the data is, and it doesn't sound like you have good data. Chances are you will not like the results of the school evaluation (will likely not have any suggestions for how to address EF), so be prepared to request another IEE. Make sure both the school eval and IEE are for ALL areas of concern, including transition. A good IEE regarding transition should show what EF skills are missing and what should be taught. A good IEE/FBA will also show that head down behavior is not a choice, is related to his dysregulation, and is something that needs to be addressed with goals and in the BIP. In order to "communicate this to the team" and make them "see it," you need data. You will not be able to accomplish this prior to the annual meeting, but IEP's can be amended at anytime and IEP meetings should be held after additional data is received (in the form of the school's eval and later the IEE).

Hi Elizabeth. First, my apologies if this is too late for your meeting. (I see that you posted this 20 hours ago referencing an IEP meeting for "tomorrow," and I'm just now reading it.) Second, I'm a visual person, so I'm having a little difficulty tracking all this without seeing the actual IEP document, but will give it a go Minutes for small group instruction and minutes for push-in should be listed separately. Also, consultation should be listed separately from specialized instruction. Finally, 12 hours a year is ridiculous. At least get it down to monthly. Reducing anything requires data. If they do it anyway, make sure they put it in a PWN and include the reasons for the reduction. You and the parents have a right to ask for clarity in the IEP document. If the different delivery methods are confusing and make it hard to account for time (which may be the intent of the SD), ask for (I would even draft) suggested changes.

You need to request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE). The school must provide this or take you to due process (so 99% of the time schools provide it). The school also has to pay the cost of an IEE. All you have to say is that you disagree with their evaluation. They may ask you why you disagree, but by law you don't have to give any reasons. Make sure the IEE is done in all areas you want assessed - including and especially any areas the school failed to assess or only did observations.

Unless someone else knows of an exception, school districts are not required to pay for an IEE provider to attend an IEP meeting. YOU may think they're not qualified to discuss that, but THEY are not going to think/say/admit that. They are going to stand by their evaluations and the staff they have to interpret them. If the school district thought they didn't have the appropriate staff "inhouse" to do a certain evaluation, they would have procured an outside evaluator to do the school eval. This is all theoretical, of course, and may not be the case in reality, but that's the position the school district is going to take. If you really want the IEE provider to attend, here are a few things you can do to reduce the cost of having to pay him/her: 1) Have them attend via Zoom. 2) Ask the IEP team ahead of time to have them go first on the agenda so that they can leave. Or have a specific time at which they participate. That way they're not sitting through the entire meeting racking up their billable hours. 3) Pay them to write up an additional report with anything you think would be helpful to delineate or clarify from the evaluation (specifically referring to present level, IEP goals, and accommodations) which you can provide to the IEP team prior to the meeting.

Hi Christi! I am in Missouri, also! But my answer is based on federal law. It depends on what the language therapy involves. It can be considered "related services" under a 504 Plan and might look like pulling the student out once a week for therapy, to participate in a small group setting, etc. But if the language therapy involves specialized instruction, for that, you would need an IEP. Feel free to provide details of the language therapy in a reply, if you need further clarification. Or contact me offline at crowlett@dyslexiaadvocates.net.

Let me preface this with I am NOT in PA, and I know many people on this site are, so hopefully they will chime in with any relevant PA specifics. In general, paraprofessional can absolutely provide academic supports, which includes instructional support (with some exceptions, maybe, for specialized instruction which requires training, such as reading instruction in Orton-Gillingham). The supports you have indicated in your post seem to be very reasonable accommodations that a para can provide. I believe school districts do have the right to designate which staff members will provide which accommodations, but if the person they designate (are they saying the gen ed teacher should be doing this?) is unable to do so or unable to do so in a timely manner in order for the accommodation to be effective, that might be a better argument. (Stated, of course, in a way that does not criticize the gen ed teacher in any way - it is often the case that gen ed teachers simply don't have the time to make sure all accommodations in all IEP's are addressed. Which is one of the very reasons for a 1:1!) I would ask for an IEP meeting to discuss the practical implications of what they are implementing - your child is not getting chunking and modeling in a way (or at all?) to allow her to process information and participate in the gen ed classroom with her peers (depending on how confrontation you want to get, you could throw in words like "denial of FAPE" and "discrimination based on disability" and "failure to follow the IEP document/accommodations"). Instead of taking on the burden of proof yourself for why a para can do these thing, turn it back on the team and ask "why can't she? Where does it say this in federal or state law/guidelines?" But I agree that it would be helpful to come armed with something specific from PA, so hopefully others will respond to this post.

I understand that this doesn't feel like a typical path, but in my opinion, that's the way you need to treat it if you want to get an IEP - don't give the school any wiggle room to argue "they didn't get the correct request, etc." I don't know all the facts and may be making some incorrect assumptions based on what facts you did provide, but here are my thoughts. The fact that the director of spec ed is requesting the referral email would to me mean a referral for special education. Yet on the other hand he asks for a list of accommodations, which would mean a 504 Plan which shouldn't be under his purview (instead would be a 504 coordinator). So it's a little confusing. But regardless of what he is asking for or why, you need to send an email requesting a referral for special education and it SHOULD be a "typical starting request." Your daughter is not in special education, so anytime you reach out and ask for this it is considered a "starting request." If you don't do it this way, the school might figure out a way to say you never asked for a referral for special education. In your email, reference your outside report (I would also resend it along with your email just to be safe and so it is included with your official request). Unfortunately, following the process (which I HIGHLY suggest) means the school gets to do their own evaluation if they want to (since, if I'm following the fact pattern correctly, they haven't done an evaluation since 5th grade). You may think they won't want to because it's from the same center they use, etc., but don't over think this this and FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE. They may very well say they want to do their own evaluation so they can get an extra 60 days...?? (But I'm not real sure how the timeline would be affected if they accept your eval.) In any event, although it may not feel like it, you're starting from ground zero and need to do everything from that standpoint. As far as the spec ed director asking for your list of accommodations, that's a little strange this early in the process. But you could send one (MAKE IT A SEPARATE EMAIL from your referral email) in response listing the ones set forth in your evaluation with the caveat that "these may not be all that are necessary and more may come up during the IEP process with the entire team." That way he understands that you're not thinking 504 - you're thinking IEP.

Here are my suggestions: 1) In the meeting itself (and I do realize in your specific case, it's too late for this, but just for future reference) whenever there is a refusal of a parent request (or anything else you think should be documented in a PWN), make sure to state very clearly, "Can you include that refusal (or whatever) in the PWN?" Sometimes they're caught off guard and say "yes." Either way, you have them "on record" as either agreeing to include it or not. If they agree and it's not in the PWN you receive, follow up with an email reminding them that they agree to put it in the PWN. [Sidenote: Since it sounds like you're having problems with documentation following a meeting, you might want to consider recording future meetings. Then regardless of the language in the PWN, refusals, etc., are documented. I don't know what state you are in for purposes of telling you whether you have a right to record (you have the right if it's a one-party state), but even if you are in a one-party state, school districts can limit that right in a school board policy, such as requiring 24 hours' advance notice, so make sure you comply with any school policy on this issue.] 2) Although LEA's do have some discretion, they still have to follow the law regarding PWN's. So use the language from the IDEA regarding PWN's, as well as any pertinent state regs or laws. Also check your state Department of Education website, specifically special education compliance department (or just call), to see if they have put out any policies or guidelines regarding PWN's. My state DOE has a very detailed list of what is required to be on a PWN. If any of the IDEA language/state laws or state policies are on point with what you are asking for in the PWN, quote that language in your request for a correction. 3) If it is a PWN that requires parent signature (unfortunately, most don't), write a note below your signature that you disagree that XYY was not set forth on the PWN. That way, XYZ effectively IS on the PWN. 4) ALWAYS follow up with an email after you receive a PWN that you disagree with detailing specifically what you feel is missing or incorrect (including the REASONS BEHIND the decisions - a very common requirement that is often lacking in PWN's, in my opinion) . That's still documentation and the next best thing to having it in a PWN - and will hopefully be enough if your matter ever goes to due process, especially if the LEA wasn't following requirements set forth in the law regarding PWN's.

Seems to me the school would need to try more services (certainly more than 30 minutes a week, for crying out loud!) and accommodations to meet the least restrictive environment requirement before going directly to a self-contained classroom. If the neuropsychologist report is showing him so far behind that she's recommending self-contained, maybe another approach (assuming you want to keep him in the regular education setting) would be to argue the school failed at "child find" and now owe compensatory services - instead of putting him in a self-contained class due to their error.

Totally agree with Jenna's approach. But I'm also curious how the "new language in his IEP" come about??

I'm not in Minnesota and don't know what a "conciliation meeting" is, but I'll assume for purposes of responding to this post that it is a form of IEP meeting. If it's noted in the present levels of the IEP that she doesn't stop what she's doing to use the bathroom even with a watch reminder, it needs to stay in the IEP as an accommodation that the school staff reminds her and makes sure she actually goes to the bathroom. A goal for her to independently go to the bathroom after the watch reminder may be appropriate, but if she hasn't met this goal yet, the accommodation of the school following up should stay until it is met. Are the school's reasons ("do not believe it is necessary" and "she's bigger and has a bigger bladder") substantiated by any data? Ask for that at the upcoming meeting. If they don't have any or if you don't agree with their data, as for an IEE. If you have a provider stating and data to show she needs staff to do this due to a disability, they have to put it in the IEP/IHP or else, you're correct - it's a potential ADA/civil rights violation.

Also, if you do happen to get "lab partner" added as an accommodation, I agree with Backroads that specific language will be difficult. You will probably have to let the school choose the partner and then reconvene as a team if that particular partner isn't working out. But you'll need "proof" as to why it's not working out.

I would suggest first approaching this from the general education classroom, rather than from accommodations in the IEP. If all the other students have lab partners, he should have one, too. It shouldn't have to be an accommodation in his IEP. I would reach out to the science teacher (even though I realize she is uncooperative and this may not get you anywhere) and nicely say, "I realize that my son's lab partner moved away, but is there anyway he can be placed with a lab partner? If there is an odd number of students in the class, could he be placed in a group of three?" If that doesn't get you anywhere, I would then reach out to the principal and get a little more direct. Lay out the issue, then state: "I have tried to resolve this issue by not having to involve the IEP team and/or requesting additional accommodations, but I have been unsuccessful. I am just asking that my student have access to the same classroom experience as the other students in his science class. " Or something to that effect. Hopefully, the principal will get the "hint" that your student is potentially being discriminated against due to his disability. If that doesn't work, then you may have to request an IEP meeting add an accommodation. The potential sticking point with that (and one reason why I suggest trying to work this out in the gen ed setting) is that you will need data to support that he needs a lab partner. It is much easier (or should be) to just say "hey, everybody else has a lab partner to help complete labs, why shouldn't my son?"

It sounds like they're just strongly discouraging this, rather than flat out denying it (which hopefully means they know the law). The parents need to respond to Notices of Meeting that they are bringing their advocate. If they get a response in return either discouraging this or flat out denying it, they need to respond "thank you for your suggestion, but we will still be bringing our advocate as the IDEA allows parents to bring whoever they want to the IEP meeting."

Hi Christina. I advocate in Missouri, specializing in specific learning disabilities (particularly, dyslexia), but also am familiar with ADHD and other disabilities, which often go hand in hand with specific learning disabilities. In Missouri, the discrepancy model is only used for determining eligibility under the category of specific learning disability. This lack of discrepancy between IQ and academic scores does NOT affect her eligibility under other disabilities, such as Intellectual Disorder (low IQ), Other Health Impairment (ADHD), or Young Child with a Developmental Delay. It appears that your daughter might very well qualify under any of these categories. My recommendations are as follows: 1) Don't give up on the public school just yet. In my opinion, they haven't done the proper evaluations yet and could be "forced" to do more. 2) So my second recommendation is what Sharon suggested - ask for an IEE (Individual Educational Evaluation). Make sure it is done in all areas of suspected disabilities, which it appears (but I don't have all the facts) the school district's evaluation did not do. 3) As far as dyslexia, I wouldn't rule that out as a possibility just yet. The definition and diagnosis of dyslexia is very complicated. Although rare, it is possible to have both a low IQ and dyslexia. Plus, what kind of IQ test was administered? If she does have dyslexia, a non-verbal IQ test should be done, and most school districts don't do that. 4) Ask for a 504 evaluation. At a minimum, she needs accommodations. And getting her back on an IEP (I assume you're beyond the 10 days of the school district's notification that they were exiting her from services?) will take time. A 504 Plan can be implemented much quicker. 5) Depending on what the IEE shows in terms of dyslexia, reading struggles, etc., if you decide to go the home-school route, I would suggest reaching out to a tutor certified in Orton-Gillingham or another recognized multi-sensory, structured literacy program. I am happy to expand/explain if you would like to contact me offline. Carolyn Rowlett (crowlett@dyslexiaadvocates.net or 816-547-5476)

If you have data showing the need for 1:1 instruction, it's a totally reasonable request and something public schools can absolutely provide. But an easier way to get this would be to show he is not making sufficient progress with the instruction that is currently being provided, which prompts a change in services. Get specifics in the IEP; i.e., "receives in instruction in small group setting with no more than 6 (or whatever number the team decides on) students." When that doesn't work after 6 weeks/a quarter's worth of progress monitoring, ask that the services be changed to no more than 3 students. If that doesn't work, then 2, etc., until you ask for 1:1 instruction. The "ask" has to be based on data and lack of progress with services currently being used.

You are correct! But see the link below for help in making this argument. https://www.makespecialeducationwork.com/blog/what-gives-parents-the-right-to-request-a-team-meeting