El Dorado County
Charter SELPA
Procedural Guide
For
Special Education
1st Edition
(November, 2007)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter I - Identification, Assessment, Instructional Planning
and Review Procedures ............................................................................... 1
Referral, Assessment and Placement—General Timelines…………………………………. 2
Pre-Referral Process ................................................................................ 3
Referral Process ...................................................................................... 3
Interim Administrative Placements ......................................................... 4
Individual Assessment Plan (IAP)…………………………………………………………….4
Assessment……………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Test Selection and Administration…………………………………………………………..6
Assessment Reports…………………………………………………………………………….....7
Parent Participation…………………………………………………..……………………………8
Individualized Education Program Team (IEPT) Meeting…………………………8
Annual and Other Reviews ..................................................................... 13
Three Year Re-evaluations (Triennial Reviews)………………………………….…..13
Appendix to Chapter I ........................................................................................ 15
Surrogate Parent Procedures ................................................................. 16
Independent Educational Evaluations..................................................... 18
IEP Forms………………………………………………………………………………………………26
Referral/IAP/Parents’ Rights/Interim Placement/Triennial Reassessment
Worksheet/Parent PIR/Meeting Notice………………………………………………...28
ii
Chapter II - Interagency Referral and Placement Procedures………………………43
Referral, Placement and Review of Placement Process for State Schools…………44
Referral and Placement Process for Nonpublic School Placements ………………..45
Placement Process for Out-of-State Nonpublic Schools……………………………………47
Chapter III - Eligibility Criteria..................................................................... 48
Overview of Eligibility Criteria…………………………………………………………………………..49
Mental Retardation (MR)…………………………………………………………….………..50
Hard of Hearing (HH)…………………………………………………………………………….51
Deafness (D) ........................................................................................... 51
Speech or Language Impairment-General Eligibility Summary………………52
Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Articulation Disorder …………….…53
Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Abnormal Voice .……………………..53
Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Fluency Disorder ....................... 53
Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Language Disorder .................... 53
Visual Impairment (V) ............................................................................ 54
Emotional Disturbance (ED) ................................................................... 54
Orthopedic Impairment (OI) .................................................................. 55
Other Health Impairment (OHI) ............................................................. 55
Specific Learning Disability (SLD) ........................................................... 56
Deaf-Blindness (DB) ............................................................................... 59
Multiple Disabilities (MD) ...................................................................... 60
iii
Autism (AUT) ......................................................................................... 60
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) ................................................................... 61
Appendix to Chapter III…………………………………………………………………………………….62
Attention Deficit Disorder Guidelines ..................................................... 63
Chapter IV - Due Process Hearing and Complaint Procedures ...................... 65
Due Process Hearing ......................................................................................... 66
Initiating a Due Process Hearing……………………………………………………………67
Informal Review ..................................................................................... 68
Resolution Session…………………………………………………………………………………68
Mediation Conference…………………………………………………………………………..69
Due Process Hearing ............................................................................. 69
Student Placement During Hearing (Stay Put) ........................................ 70
IEP Reviews ........................................................................................... 70
Implementation of Decision .................................................................. 70
CA Department of Education Complaint Procedures ......................................... 71
Local Complaint Procedures………………………………………………………………… 71
Direct State Intervention ....................................................................... 72
Mediation Procedures………………………………………………………………………….73
Investigation Procedures ....................................................................... 73
Appendix to Chapter IV……………………………………………..………………….………………….75
Special Education Due Process Hearings Procedural Safeguards (OAH)…76
El Dorado County Charter SELPA Resolution Session Process………..………82
iv
Chapter V - Special Education Records………………………………………………………………84
Special Education Records………………………………………………………………………………..85
Access…………………………………………………………………………………………………..85
Confidentiality of Records ...................................................................... 86
Transfer of Records ................................................................................ 86
Correction or Removal of Information .................................................... 87
Record Classification and Destruction .................................................... 88
Appendix to Chapter V………………………………………………………………………………………90
Special Education Records Request Process Form…………………………………91
Chapter VI - Student Discipline and Behavior ................................................... 92
Suspension and Expulsion of Special Education Students…………………………………93
Manifestation Determination Guidelines……………………………………………..93
Definition of Manifestation Determination…………………………………………..93
Process…………………………………………………………………………………………………93
Manifestation Determination Requirements………………………………………..94
Recommended Procedures for a Manifestation Meeting……………………..95
Behavioral Interventions for Students with Disabilities (Hughes Bill)………………..97
Functional Analysis Assessment……………………………………………………………97
Behavior Intervention Plan…………………………………………………………………..98
Evaluation…………………………………………………………………………………………….99
Making Changes to the Behavior Intervention Plan…………………………….100
Behavior Intervention Case Manager (BICM)………………………………………100
v
Responsibilities of the Behavior Intervention Case Manager………………101
Behavior Intervention Planning Team…………………………………………………101
Behavioral Emergency Procedures…………………………………………………………………103
Behavior Emergency Report…………………………………………………………………………..104
Federal Requirements for Addressing Behavior in Students With
Exceptional Needs………………………………………………………………………………………….105
Overview of Differences between FAA and FBA……………………………………………..106
Positive Behavior Support Plans……………………………………………………………………..107
Appendix to Chapter VI…………………………………………………………………………………..108
Positive Behavior Intervention Plan (Hughes Bill) Materials…………………109
Positive Behavior Support Plan Forms…………………………………………………119
Chapter VII – Miscellaneous....................................................................................124
El Dorado County Charter SELPA Transportation Policy…………………………………..125
CDE Special Education Transportation Guidelines…………………………………………..126
vi
1
CHAPTER I
IDENTIFICATION, ASSESSMENT,
INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING AND
REVIEW PROCEDURES
2
REFERRAL, ASSESSMENT AND PLACEMENT
GENERAL TIMELINES
1. REFERRAL- A referral may be initiated by a parent, teacher, student or other
knowledgeable person. Procedures for handling referrals are to be determined in
each Charter LEA.
2. ASSESSMENT PLAN - Within 15 calendar days of receiving the referral, an
assessment plan is to be developed and a copy given to the parents. A copy of
the Notice of Parent Rights shall be included with the assessment plan.
For students currently enrolled in a special education program, an Individual
Assessment Plan (IAP) will be developed any time a student is to be re-assessed.
3. PARENT CONSENT - No assessment shall be conducted unless the written
consent of the parent is obtained. Parents have at least 15 days from receipt of
the assessment plan to make a decision. Assessment may begin immediately
upon receipt of consent.
4. IEP TEAM- Within 60 calendar days of receipt of the signed IAP, a team meeting
is to be held and an individual education program developed for an eligible
student. Parents are to be invited to all meetings regarding the educational
program for their child.
5. PROGRAM PLACEMENT- Written parent permission must be obtained prior to
placement. The recommended program placement and services should begin as
soon as possible from the date of parent’s written approval of the IEP.
6. ANNUAL REVIEW - Each special education pupil’s educational program must be
reviewed at least annually.
7. RE-EVALUATION- At least every 3 years, a special education student will be re-
evaluated. Prior to the three year review, the IEP team shall review existing data
on the child and determine what additional data is needed.
8. INTERIM ADMINISTRATIVE PLACEMENTS - When a special education student
transfers from one SELPA to another, the following timelines apply:
PROGRAM PLACEMENT- Immediate implementation, to the extent possible,
of the student’s existing Individualized Education Program. An Interim
Placement form is completed immediately upon enrollment and parent
signature is obtained.
ASSESSMENT- Information, records and reports from the prior district may
be utilized to make program recommendations. Upon receipt of the signed
Individual Assessment Plan, the team will conduct any additional assessment
needed to determine educational needs and make program
recommendations.
IEP TEAM MEETING- Within 30 days, the IEP team will meet to review the
placement, review any new completed assessments, and develop new goals
and objectives if needed.
3
PRE-REFERRAL PROCESS
1. Parents will be contacted whenever there is a concern about their child’s
progress.
2. Although a referral for special education assessment may be initiated by a
parent, teacher, student or other knowledgeable person, current law requires
that all options in the general program be tried before referral to special
education. These options may include, but are not limited to, the following:
Provide accommodations within the general education program
Provide research-based instructional strategies and interventions, including
universal screening, “tiered” interventions, progress monitoring and problem
solving teams within the general education program (Response to
Intervention model).
Consultation with appropriate staff
Referral to alternative programs within the Charter LEA
Referral to professional and/or agencies outside of the Charter LEA
3. All options are to be explored by the general education staff prior to referral. The
procedure to be followed when a student is first seen as having difficulty will be
the responsibility of the general staff.
4. When all of the general education options have been implemented but have not
met with success, the student may be referred for special education
consideration.
REFERRAL PROCESS
1. The specific procedures for handling referrals are to be determined in each
Charter LEA; however, written documentation must be included in the referral
that appropriate alternatives, accommodations and interventions have been
implemented. (Written documentation should include but not be limited to the
Referral Form located in the appendix of this chapter, or in the document library
of SEIS.)
2. Referrals may be submitted by the following persons:
Student Study Team/Student Intervention Team comprised of teachers,
specialists, etc.
Parents
Other service providers or knowledgeable persons
3. All referrals should be submitted to the pupil’s Charter LEA of attendance. If the
student is not of school age, the child shall be referred to the district of
residence.
4. All referrals for special education and related services shall initiate the
assessment process and shall be documented. When a verbal referral is made,
staff of the Charter LEA or Charter Special Educational Local Plan Area (SELPA)
4
shall assist the individual in making a written request for assessment for special
education.
5. Upon receipt of a referral, the administrator/designee must initiate one of the
following actions:
If referral information is incomplete, contact the referral source and request
additional information in order to process the referral in a timely manner.
If referral is complete, then take one of the following actions:
a. Charter LEA personnel will notify the parent that a referral was made,
develop an IAP, and deliver the completed plan to the parents within 15
calendar days from receipt of the referral.
b. If the referral is determined to be inappropriate, a meeting will be
scheduled with parents and referring party to address their educational
concerns and review the purpose and scope of Special Education. In the
event the parents do not wish to meet, the Charter LEA must respond in
writing with a prior written notice explaining why the request for
assessment is not being accepted and processed.
NOTE: A parent’s referral for special education must receive a prompt response in
writing.
INTERIM ADMINISTRATIVE PLACEMENTS
1. Whenever a special education student transfers from one SELPA to another, the
following shall occur:
The necessary paperwork is completed and signed. (See Interim Placement
Form in the appendix to this chapter.)
The student’s existing IEP is implemented to the extent possible.
An appropriate Individual Assessment Plan (IAP) is developed if needed.
Assessment is completed and an IEP is held to review the placement
within 30 days.
2. Current information, records and reports from the prior district will be reviewed
and utilized to make recommendations. Any additional assessment needed to
determine educational needs and make program recommendations will be
conducted prior to the IEP.
INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT PLAN (IAP)
1. An IAP will be developed within 15 calendar days of receipt of referral for special
education and shall:
Be individualized to reflect the unique concerns and strengths of each
student.
5
Be provided in the primary language of the parent or another mode of
communication used by the parent, unless to do so is clearly not feasible.
Provide an explanation of each type of assessment instrument to be
administered, the purpose of the instrument, and the professional personnel
responsible for the administration and interpretation of the instrument.
State that no educational placement will result from the assessment without
the consent of the parent.
2. A copy of the notice of Parental Rights and Procedural Safeguards for Special
Education shall be attached to the IAP. (See appendix to this chapter for a copy
of the IAP and the Parental Rights and Procedural Safeguards for Special
Education.)
3. No assessment shall be conducted unless the written consent of the parent is
obtained prior to the evaluation. Assessment may begin immediately upon
receipt of such consent.
4. The parent shall have at least 15 calendar days from the receipt of the proposed
IAP to arrive at a decision.
5. If a parent is not identified or the location of the parent is unknown, a surrogate
parent must be appointed to represent the individual with exceptional needs.
See Chapter I Appendix for specific policies and procedures regarding surrogate
parents.
NOTE: Personal contact with the parents is strongly recommended to explain the
process and forms.
ASSESSMENT
1. The assessment will be completed and an IEPT meeting held to review the
results of the assessment within 60 calendar days from the date of receipt of
the parent’s written consent for assessment. The 60 day timeline does not
include days between the pupil’s regular school sessions, terms, or days of
school vacation in excess of five school days.
2. Assessments must address all areas related to the suspected disability and be
conducted by a multidisciplinary team, including the parent. The following areas
shall be considered where appropriate:
health and development * vision, including low vision
hearing * motor abilities
language function * general ability
academic performance * self help
orientation and mobility * career and vocational abilities/interests
social and emotional status * developmental history
6
3. For pupils with suspected learning disabilities or behavior disorders, at least one
member of the assessment team, other than the child’s general teacher, shall
observe the child’s performance in the general classroom setting and document
the observation.
4. The Charter LEA nurse will be the school’s liaison with the pupil’s primary health
provider unless the assessment plan specifies otherwise.
5. All pupils being assessed for initial and three year reviews shall be screened in
the areas of hearing and vision, unless parent consent is denied.
6. All pupils continuing to fail a threshold hearing test shall be assessed by
appropriately trained personnel for hearing.
7. For pupils who have been medically diagnosed with a chronic illness or acute
health problem, relevant information shall be included within the assessment
and reviewed by the IEPT.
8. No single procedure is used as the sole criterion for determining an appropriate
educational program for an individual with exceptional needs.
9. Under certain conditions, parents have the right to obtain an independent
outside assessment at public expense. If a parent disagrees with an assessment
obtained or conducted by the Charter LEA, the Charter LEA may:
offer to obtain another assessment from a professional within the Charter
SELPA.
obtain an independent educational assessment.
initiate due process to show its assessment was proper.
Note: See Appendix to Chapter I for information on Independent Educational
Evaluations.
TEST SELECTION AND ADMINISTRATION
1. Testing and assessment materials and procedures used for the purpose of
assessment and placement of individuals with exceptional needs are selected
and administered so as not be to racially, culturally or sexually discriminatory.
2. Tests and other assessment materials must meet all of the following
requirements:
Are provided and administered in the pupil’s native language or other
mode of communication, unless the IAP indicates reasons why such
provision and administration are not feasible.
Have been validated for the specific purpose for which they are used.
Are administered by trained personnel in conformance with the instructions
provided by the producer of such tests and other assessment materials.
Do not violate State Department of Education directives, including but not
limited to judgment rendered in the Larry P. case.*
7
*In order to comply with the Larry P. directive from the State Department of Education,
the ethnicity of each student shall be recorded on the IAP by the parent. If there is any
question regarding the ethnicity of the child as it has been recorded on the form, the
case manager may discuss the situation with the parent for clarification purposes. In all
cases, the parents determine the ethnicity of their child.
A test of intelligence, often called an I.Q. test, is the method used to measure
intellectual ability, and such a test normally would be given as part of this assessment.
However, a directive of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction by an order of a
federal court prohibits the use of I.Q. tests in any special education evaluation of an
African American student. In all cases where standardized assessment is not permitted
or is judged to be inappropriate, alternative measures will be used in accordance with
recommendations set forth by the California Association of School Psychologists and will
be documented on the student’s IEP.
Federal Regulations and California Education Code require a pupil’s intellectual ability
be established in order to determine if a severe discrepancy exists between intellectual
ability and academic achievement when a specific learning disability is suspected. The
State of California, however, is in a transition period awaiting regulations that will clarify
how RtI (Response to Intervention) will be utilized in the identification of students with
a specific learning disability. Therefore, Charter LEA personnel should incorporate both
discrepancy and RtI models in order to establish a specific learning disability, and use
caution in using this eligibility category without exhausting all general education
interventions.
ASSESSMENT REPORTS
1. The assessment reports shall include, but not be limited to the following:
The student’s present level of educational performance.
The relevant behavior noted during the observation of the student in an
appropriate setting.
The relationship of that behavior to the student’s academic and social
functioning.
The educationally relevant medical findings, if any.
Whether there is such a discrepancy between achievement and ability that it
cannot be corrected without special education and related services.
A determination concerning the effects of environmental, cultural, or
economic disadvantage, where appropriate.
How the student’s disability affects involvement and progress in the
general curriculum.
What is the student’s historical and current functioning in the general
education curriculum regardless of the setting?
8
What deficits in the student’s cognitive functioning, communicative
functioning, social/emotional functioning and physical functioning might
serve as a barrier to their successful involvement in the general education
curriculum?
What has been the impact of the student’s attendance on his/her
achievement?
PARENT PARTICIPATION
1. Parents are specifically included as members of the IEP team, and all efforts
should be made to ensure their participation.
2. Parent concerns regarding their son’s or daughter’s educational progress shall be
noted and documented on the IEP.
3. In addition, information and reports submitted by the parents, including the
results of independent assessments, must be considered by the IEP team. (See
appendix at the end of this chapter for a copy of the Parent Information
Request.)
INDIVIDUALIZED EDUCATION PROGRAM TEAM (IEPT) MEETING
(Copies of all IEP forms may be accessed on the seis.org website.)
A. PARENT NOTIFICATION
1. After the assessment has been completed, the parent must be notified and
informed that an IEP Team meeting, including the parent and his or her
representative, will be scheduled.
Parents are to be given sufficient written notice of the meeting so that they
can attend. (See appendix at the end of this chapter.)
Scheduling should occur at a mutually agreed upon time and place.
The notice will indicate the purpose, time, and location of the meeting, and
who will attend.
The Charter LEA will arrange for an interpreter if necessary.
2. In addition, it is the responsibility of the case manager to notify all appropriate
IEPT members in a timely fashion to ensure their participation.
3. It should be noted that parents, Charter LEAs, and the SELPA are authorized to
electronically record IEP meetings with 24 hours notice to the IEP team. If the
recording is at the request of the Charter LEA or the SELPA, and the parent
objects or refuses to attend the meeting because it will be recorded, then the
meeting shall not be recorded.
9
B. IEP TEAM MEMBERSHIP
1. Required membership of the IEP Team for purposes of developing, revising or
reviewing the IEP, determining eligibility, and/or recommending placement for
any pupil shall be:
An administrator or a designee (other than the student’s teacher) who is
knowledgeable of program options appropriate for the student. This person
must be able to make decisions and allocate resources.
The student’s current general education teacher. (If the student does not
have a general education teacher, the teacher with the most recent and
complete knowledge of the child shall attend. If no such teacher is available,
a general classroom teacher qualified to teach a student of his or her age
shall attend.)
At least one special education teacher.
One or both of the student’s parents, an individual selected by the parent, or
both.
2. When appropriate, the IEP team will also include:
The student.
Other persons who possess expertise or knowledge necessary for the
development of the IEP.
The person(s) who conducted an assessment or who is knowledgeable about
the assessment procedures used, and is familiar with the results of the
assessment.
For students with suspected learning disabilities, at least one member of the
IEP team, other than the student’s general teacher, shall be a person who
has observed the student’s educational performance in an appropriate
setting.
IDEA 2004 allows for the excusal of IEP team members. Follow all necessary
steps and use only when absolutely necessary. (See Excusal Form in SEIS.)
3. Expanded Membership
When a student needs special education services for more than 50% of the
school day and/or is changing from a less restrictive to a more restrictive
setting, the IEP team shall include a person who is knowledgeable of the full
range of program options available within the Charter LEA.
When an IEP team, after reviewing assessment results, determines that a
child is emotionally disturbed and residential placement is recommended,
the IEP team expands to include a representative of the county mental
health department. A referral to County Mental Health is made through a
“26.5 Referral”. County Mental Health will assess and determine if the
student is eligible for CMH services. The IEP will be reviewed by the IEP team,
including the mental health representative, at least every six months.
10
4. An expanded membership meeting will also be held when transition services are
under consideration.
C. AGENDA
It is essential that a well organized and structured IEP Team meeting be conducted.
The agenda which follows is recommended as a guide for conducting IEP Team
meetings. Depending on the purpose of the meeting, the agenda may be amended.
Efforts should be made to present information in a manner that is easily understood
by all members of the IEP team, including the parents. (The most recent State
Template IEP Manual is available in the document library of SEIS. Specific
instructions for completing the IEP forms is available in this document. Check
periodically for updates from the State SELPA organization.)
Part I
Introduction of All Persons Present (Record names of attendees in meeting
notes.)
Purpose: Chairperson should briefly review the purpose of the meeting.
Parents’ Rights:
a. Verify that parents received a notice of Parental Rights and Procedural
Safeguards when approval for assessment was obtained.
b. Chairperson may ask if any further clarification is desired, or if parents
have any questions regarding their rights and procedural safeguards.
c. At an initial IEP and at the three year review, a complete parent folder
should be offered.
d. Complete Family Information Checklist and obtain parents’ signatures.
History of the Case: Chairperson or designee should provide a short,
pertinent history of the case, including program modifications attempted,
and the student’s historical and current functioning in the General Education
Curriculum. Parents should have an opportunity to share their concerns and
provide relevant information to the team.
Review of Information:
a. The IEP team shall review existing data on the child including:
evaluations and information provided by the parents of the child
current classroom-based assessments and observations
teacher and related services providers observation
b. Individuals who participated in the assessment process, or individuals
qualified to interpret results should report on the assessment conducted.
c. Assessment reports should be restricted to relevant, functional
information, and should avoid subjective observations and
interpretations.
11
d. The assessment reports should contain information that will assist the IEP
team in determining whether the pupil has a specific disability, and shall
establish the basis for making the determination.
e. Discuss all assessments and document levels of performance on the IEP.
Determine Eligibility:
a. If the Team determines that the student is not eligible for special
education services, document on the IEP form that “assessment results
indicate that special education services are not appropriate at this time”
and check the box on the form indicating “not eligible”.
b. If further assessment is needed to clarify eligibility, the IEP team meeting
may be suspended pending further testing or evaluation, but reconvened
as soon as possible.
c. If the student is not eligible for Special Education services, but
educational concerns are present, the IEP team meeting should be
concluded. Adjourn the meeting at this time. Then general education
support options should be explored, including referral to the Student
Study Team for consideration of 504 accommodations.
d. If the student is determined by the IEP Team to be eligible for Special
Education, proceed with Part II of the IEP meeting agenda.
Part II
Develop the Individualized Education Program (IEP), including the
Individual Transition Plan (ITP) for students age 16 and over.
a. Identify needs based on the current evaluation and include:
Student needs related to involvement and progress in the general
education curriculum (academic needs).
Other educational needs that result from the disability.
Transition needs for students age 16 and over.
If the student is identified as Limited English Proficient (LEP), the
language needs of the student have been considered and noted on
the IEP.
If the student is legally blind or visually impaired, instruction is
provided in Braille OR the IEP team documents why instruction in
Braille is not appropriate.
b. Establish Goals and Short Term Objectives: Include a statement of each
measurable annual goal, including academic and functional goals,
designed to do the following:
Meet the individual’s needs that result from the individual’s
disability in order to enable the pupil to be involved in and make
progress in the general curriculum.
12
Meet each of the pupil’s other educational needs that result
from the individual’s disability.
At annual and three year reviews, IEP teams must address the
previous year’s goals and objectives and note on the document
whether goals were met. If previous goals were not met, document
action to be taken (i.e. continue, discontinue or modify).
Short-term objectives are no longer required for students who are
receiving accommodations only in the general education curriculum.
c. Recommend Services Needed:
The IEP team shall develop a list of services and/or equipment
necessary to achieve the annual goals developed. Frequency,
duration and location of services to be provided must be specified on
the IEP. Frequency of service may reflect a range of time or sessions
to allow for scheduling variability.
d. Consider Program Alternatives:
In considering program alternatives, the IEP team shall make
recommendations based on the individual needs of the student and
not on the category under which the student is determined to be
eligible for Special Education (not based on label but on needs).
To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities should
be educated with children who are not disabled. The IEP team shall
consider the full continuum of program options to ensure that all
students are provided a free appropriate public education in the Least
Restrictive Environment (LRE) and document options considered on
the IEP.
After reviewing all program options, the IEP team shall recommend
appropriate specialized academic instruction and services, calculated
to offer the student’s the opportunity to achieve educational benefit.
e. Sign Appropriate Forms
All IEP Team members, including parents and student (when student
is in attendance) sign the IEP. If parents consent to the IEP and
placement of their child, they will so note and sign the IEP document.
If the parent does not consent to all components of the IEP, then
those components of the program to which the parents has
consented may be implemented so as not to delay providing
instruction and services to the student. The parent should be
informed of their Due Process rights. (Refer to Section IV of this
document for Due Process Guidelines).
f. Distribute completed forms to appropriate individuals.
13
ANNUAL AND OTHER REVIEWS
1. The IEP and placement of individuals in special education shall be scheduled for
review by a Team at least once a year (determined by the month/day of the initial
or annual IEP).
2. For emotionally disturbed students in residential placements, the IEP review and
reassessment shall be conducted after six months in accordance with state law.
3. In addition, a parent may request that an IEP review be conducted at any time.
When the case manager receives such a request (preferably in writing), an IEP
must be held within 30 days.
4. It is appropriate to hold an IEP review if the student is not making sufficient
progress towards goals and objectives.
5. Parents and members of the IEP Team must be notified by established
notification procedures. The IEP team may:
Modify the IEP or program, including the provision of Designated Instructional
Services (D.I.S.) and other support services
Recommend continuation of current placement.
THREE YEAR RE-EVALUATIONS (TRIENNIAL REVIEWS)
1. Under IDEA, 2004, re-evaluating a student at least every three years is still
required (date determined by the month/day of the initial or latest re-
evaluation).
2. As part of this re-evaluation, the IEP Team shall review existing evaluation data,
including evaluations and information provided by the parents of the student,
current classroom-based assessments and observations, and teacher and related
service providers’ observations.
3. On the basis of that review and input from the student’s parents, the IEP team
must identify what additional information is needed to establish the present
levels of performance and determine the educational needs of the student and
to determine if the student:
continues to have a disability.
continues to need special education and related services.
requires any additions or modifications to the educational program in order to
meet his/her annual goals and participate in the general curriculum.
4. Assessment is required in the following situations:
On parent request. (Document on Individual Assessment Plan)
When dismissal from special education is being considered.
When dismissal from a specific designated instruction service is to be
terminated.
14
When the student has less than two consistent I.Q. tests.
OR
Students older than twelve who have not had one valid I.Q. test.
If there is reason to believe that there may be significant disagreement over
any IEP issues.
5. Procedures for Triennial Review:
The Case Manager will gather input from IEPT members and document on the
Triennial Reassessment Worksheet. (See appendix at the end of this chapter.)
The IEPT shall discuss the need for a triennial assessment based on the
information documented on the worksheet. This discussion can take place at:
a. The annual IEP prior to the three year evaluation IEP meeting
OR
b. At a separate meeting convened either in person or by phone
OR
c. By other informal methods used to gather input from IEPT
members.
(NOTE: A formal IEP meeting is not required to make this decision, unless
requested by the parent, or agreement can’t be reached.)
The assessment decision shall be documented by attaching the Triennial
Reassessment Worksheet to the most current IEP.
The Individual Assessment Plan will reflect the decisions documented on the
Triennial Reassessment Worksheet. (If no further assessment is needed, an
attached parent letter may be used to confirm this decision with parents).
15
Appendix to Chapter I
16
SURROGATE PARENT PROCEDURES
1. DEFINITION OF PARENT
A parent is defined (34CFR §300.30) as:
A natural or adoptive parent of a child
A guardian but not the State if the child is a ward of the State
A person acting in the place of a parent (such as a grandparent or stepparent
with whom the child lives, or a person who is legally responsible for the child’s
welfare)
An adult who has been appointed as a surrogate parent
A foster parent if the natural parents’ authority to make educational decisions on
the child’s behalf has been specifically limited by court order in accordance with
subsection (b) of Section 300.30 of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF SURROGATE PARENTS
Represents an individual with exceptional needs (IWEN) regarding:
a. Identification
b. Assessment
c. Instructional Planning and Development
d. Educational Placement
e. Reviewing and Revising the IEP
f. Other matters related to a free and appropriate education
Serves as the child’s parent and has parental rights relative to the child’s
education under Title 20 (beginning with Section 1400) of the U.S. Code and part
300 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Is culturally sensitive to the needs of the child.
3. SURROGATE PARENT APPOINTMENT BY LOCAL EDUCATIONAL
AGENCY
This appointment occurs when:
a. Child has been named a ward of the court and the parent/guardian has
been denied the right to make educational decisions for the child.
b. No parent can be identified.
c. The location of the parent is unknown.
d. Adult student is a ward of the court and has been found to be incompetent.
e. Individual has no conflict of interest in representing the child (conflict of
interest means interests that would restrict or bias the ability to freely
advocate for all required student services- i.e. Section 56026 of the
Education Code).
17
4. PERSONS, OTHER THAN THOSE WITH CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHO MAY SERVE AS
SURROGATE INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO:
Foster care providers
Retired teachers
Social workers
Probation officer not employed by child’s Charter LEA or home.
5. SURROGATE PARENT SAFEGUARDS:
A Surrogate Parent is held harmless by the State of California during execution of
duties except when actions are found to be wanton, reckless or malicious.
It is the practice in the El Dorado County Charter Consortium SELPA to offer
regular training to potential Surrogate Parents regarding the IEP process. A list of
Surrogate parents who have participated in this training is available to the
Charter LEAs in the El Dorado County Charter Consortium SELPA. A Surrogate
Parent Authorization form is available in the SELPA office.
18
INDEPENDENT EDUCATIONAL EVALUATIONS
Policy, Procedures and Evaluator Criteria
POLICY
An Overview:
The El Dorado County Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (“SELPA”) has developed
this Policy, corresponding Procedures and Criteria which govern independent educational
evaluations. For purposes of this policy, the term “SELPA” also includes the appropriate
Charter School LEA and/or administrative unit responsible for your child’s education.
Parents should be sure to read the entire document carefully. The Policy, Procedures and
Criteria are intended to be read in conjunction with one another as one comprehensive
document. Parents who need additional information about independent educational
evaluations should contact the Director of the Charter Consortium SELPA at (530) 295-2228.
Notice to Parents:
Before obtaining an independent educational assessment, please contact the special
education administrator to discuss your assessment questions and options.
The Charter LEA/SELPA will not automatically reimburse parents who unilaterally
obtain independent educational assessments. Please review this document for
further information about a parent’s right to obtain independent assessments at
public expense.
An independent educational evaluation, if not obtained in accordance with SELPA’s
policy, procedures and criteria, may not be considered by your child’s IEP team.
Please ensure that any independent educational evaluation conforms to SELPA
requirements.
Upon parent request for an independent educational evaluation, the SELPA will
provide the parents with a copy of its policy, procedures and criteria for
independent educational evaluations.
Definitions:
“Independent educational evaluation” means an evaluation conducted by a qualified
examiner who is not employed by the responsible local educational agency.
“Public expense” means that the Charter LEA either pays for the full cost of the evaluation
or evaluation components or ensures that the evaluation or evaluation components are
otherwise provided at no cost to the parent.
19
Request for Charter LEA/SELPA Evaluation:
Parents of students receiving special education services, or suspected of having a disability
requiring special education services, may request that the El Dorado County Charter
Consortium Special Education Local Plan Area (“Charter LEA/SELPA”) complete an
evaluation or reevaluation of their child at any time. The Charter LEA/SELPA will respond to
such requests by either initiating the special education evaluation process or, if an
assessment is not needed, parents will receive written notice of refusal to evaluate and be
informed of the procedural safeguards available to parents and students. All requests for
an independent educational evaluation will be handled in accordance with the Charter
LEA/SELPA’s Independent Educational Evaluation Policy, Procedures and Criteria.
PROCEDURES
Parameters for seeking Independent Educational Evaluation:
If a parent disagrees with an evaluation by the Charter LEA and seeks an independent
educational evaluation at public expense, the Charter LEA will either A) initiate a due
process hearing to show that its evaluation is appropriate, or B) will provide the parent an
opportunity to obtain an independent educational evaluation in accordance with this policy
by arranging for the independent educational evaluation. The SELPA requires that the
parent first inform the Charter LEA in writing or document at an IEP meeting that the
parent:
Disagrees with Charter LEA/SELPA’s evaluation; and
Is requesting an independent educational evaluation at public expense.
Explanation of Disagreement:
If parents request an independent educational evaluation at the expense of the Charter
LEA, the parents will be asked to explain why they object to the Charter LEA’s evaluation.
The explanation by the parent is not required. In addition, the Charter LEA may not
unreasonably delay completion of a new assessment, completion of the independent
educational evaluation at public expense, or the initiation of due process hearing to defend
its evaluation.
Notification of Appropriate Special Education Director and SELPA Director:
If parents request an independent educational evaluation at public expense following the
parameters listed above, the appropriate Special Education Director and SELPA Director
must be notified. The Charter LEA/SELPA’s evaluation will be reviewed with the parents to
identify any areas of disagreement. Parents will be provided a copy of the policy,
procedures and criteria for independent educational evaluations. Following discussion with
20
the parents, the Charter LEA/SELPA will, without unnecessary delay, either A) file for due
process hearing; or B) offer the parent an alternative examiner which will include one of the
following:
A staff member from another school;
A staff member from another LEA in the SELPA;
A staff member from another SELPA; or
A private sector provider.
If an IEE at public expense is deemed appropriate, the Charter LEA will arrange for the
alternative evaluator, contract with an independent examiner, or otherwise ensure that an
independent educational evaluation is provided.
If the Charter LEA/SELPA proceeds with consideration of the independent educational
evaluation for payment, the Charter LEA/SELPA criteria for the locations of the evaluator(s),
the minimum qualifications of the evaluator(s), the costs of the evaluation and the use of
approved assessment instruments must be met.
If the Charter LEA initiates a due process hearing and the final decision is that the Charter
LEA’s evaluation is appropriate, the parents still have the right to an independent
educational evaluation, but not at public expense.
El Dorado County SELPA’s Requirements for Independent Educational Evaluations:
If the Charter LEA/SELPA agrees to pay for an independent evaluation at public expense, an
evaluation plan will be developed which specifies those areas to be evaluated and who will
complete each assessment. The assessment(s) completed will comply with all requirements
as set out in the Criteria for Independent Educational Evaluation (See below). As a part of
the evaluation, the examiner shall follow requirements for Charter LEA/SELPA evaluations
which include, but are not limited to:
The independent examiner must observe the student in an appropriate setting;
The independent examiner shall attend the IEP team meeting by phone or in person
at which time the evaluation will be discussed. The Charter LEA/SELPA will pay the
independent examiner to attend the IEP team meeting as part of the evaluation
responsibilities;
The independent examiner must conduct a classroom visitation;
The independent examiner must conduct interviews with parents and staff; and
Parents will be required to sign consent to reevaluate and appropriate releases to
exchange information between the independent educational evaluator(s) and the
Charter LEA/SELPA as a condition of the Charter LEA/SELPA’s agreement to pay and
provide for an independent evaluation.
21
It is the responsibility of the Charter LEA/ SELPA to make arrangements for a new
evaluation, or contract with a qualified independent examiner who is able to provide a
written report for an IEP meeting, within 60 days of the date of contracting for an
evaluation. If the selected evaluator cannot meet the timeline, the SELPA will inform the
parent and ask for agreement to an extension of time.
Release of Assessment Information and Results:
As part of the contracted evaluation, independent evaluators must agree to release their
assessment information and results directly to the Charter LEA/SELPA and parents at least
one week prior to the scheduled IEP Team meeting. All reports must be received prior to
any payment for services.
Consideration of the Independent Educational Evaluation:
Independent educational evaluations are designed to determine the educational needs of
disabled students. The IEP Team is responsible for determining placements and services.
Therefore, the IEP Team will consider recommendations obtained in independent
educational evaluations completed in accordance with this IEE policy and its implementing
procedures and criteria. However, independent educational evaluations will not control the
IEP Team’s determinations and (may not be considered if not completed by a qualified
professional) as determined by SELPA policy.
PARENT INITIATED EVALUATIONS:
Parent Notification of Intent:
Parents are requested but are not required to notify the special education department prior
to obtaining an independent educational evaluation. However, if parents obtain an
independent educational evaluation and the Charter LEA/SELPA demonstrates through a
due process hearing that the evaluation completed by the Charter LEA/SELPA was
appropriate or that the parents’ evaluation did not meet Charter LEA/SELPA criteria, the
parents will not be reimbursed for the cost of the evaluation. If the independent evaluation
obtained by the parents meets the Charter LEA/SELPA criteria,
It must be considered in any decision made with respect to the provisions of FAPE to
the student; and
It may be presented as evidence at a due process hearing regarding that student.
However, independent educational evaluations will not control the Charter LEA’s decisions
and may not even be considered if not completed by a qualified professional, as determined
by the Charter LEA.
22
Parent Request for Payment of Completed Independent Educational Evaluation:
When parents are requesting payment for an independent educational evaluation that has
already been completed, the administrator of special education programs must be notified.
Parents will be provided a copy of the Charter LEA/SELPA policy, procedures and criteria for
independent educational evaluations. A determination will be made as to whether the
Charter LEA/SELPA will initiate due process to establish the appropriateness of its
evaluation or proceed with consideration of the Charter LEA/SELPA’s obligation for payment
of the independent evaluation. The Charter LEA/SELPA’s evaluation and independent
educational evaluation will be reviewed with the parents to identify those areas of
disagreement.
Time Limitations:
The parents must request payment for the independent educational evaluation within one
calendar year of the date the results of the Charter LEA/SELPA’s evaluation were shared
with parents.
EVALUATIONS ORDERED BY HEARING OFFICERS:
If a hearing officer requests an independent educational evaluation as part of a hearing, the
cost of the evaluation must be at the Charter LEA’s expense. All requirements as described
in this document will be met.
CIRCUMSTANCES RESULTING IN EVALUATIONS NOT FUNDED BY EL DORADO COUNTY
CHARTER SELPA:
Because the parent must first disagree with the Charter LEA’s evaluation in writing or
document through the IEP, the Charter LEA/SELPA does not have an obligation to reimburse
parents for privately obtained evaluations obtained prior to the date that the Charter
LEA/SELPA’s evaluation is completed and discussed at an IEP team meeting. The Charter
LEA/SELPA is not obligated to reimburse parents for privately obtained evaluations if the
parent disagrees with the Charter LEA/SELPA’s evaluation and independently seeks a private
evaluation without first notifying the Charter LEA/SELPA in writing of their disagreement with
the Charter LEA/SELPA’s assessment and requesting an independent educational evaluation
from the Charter LEA/SELPA except as provided below.
CIRCUMSTANCES RESULTING IN PRIVATELY OBTAINED EVALUATIONS REIMBURSED BY THE
EL DORADO COUNTY CHARTER SELPA:
The Charter LEA/SELPA may reimburse parents for a privately obtained independent
educational evaluation even though the policy above was not followed in any one of the
following two circumstances:
23
Charter LEA/SELPA’s assessment has not been provided in compliance with the law.
The privately obtained evaluation assessed the student in an area of suspected
disability which was not previously assessed by the Charter LEA/SELPA and the Charter
LEA/SELPA agrees that this was an area of disability in which assessments should have
occurred.
Reimbursement will be in accordance with the El Dorado County SELPA policy, procedures
and criteria and in an amount no greater than the actual cost to the parents.
In all cases, if the Charter LEA initiates a due process hearing to show that the Charter
LEA/SELPA’s evaluation is appropriate, no reimbursement shall be made unless ordered by a
Hearing Officer.
Legal Authority 20 U.S.C. 1414(a)(1)(A) - Evaluations and re-evaluations
20 U.S.C. 1415(b)(1) - Right to independent educational evaluations
34 CFR 300.321 - Re-evaluations
34 CFR 300.502 - Independent Educational Evaluations
Comments to 34 CFR 300.502 Independent Educational Evaluations
20 U.S.C. Section 1415(b)(1)
Education Code Section 56327
34 CFR 300.505 - Parent Consent - Evaluation
34 CFR 300.530.536 - Procedures for Evaluation and Determination of
Eligibility
34 CFR 300.537 - Re-evaluations
Education Code 56329 - Independent Educational Assessments
Education Code 56381 - Reassessments
LIMITATIONS FOR EVALUATORS
Costs beyond the evaluation (i.e., food, lodging, transportation, etc.) are not covered in the
cost of the independent evaluation.
MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR EVALUATORS
All assessments must be conducted by persons competent to perform the assessment as
determined by the Charter LEA/SELPA (E.C. 56322). All assessments must be conducted in
accordance with all requirements of Federal and State law including, but not limited to,
observing the student in the appropriate setting (Education Code section 56327) and
conducting evaluations in accordance with Education Code section 56320. Evaluators with
credentials other than those listed below will not be approved.
24
Type of Assessment Qualifications
Academic Achievement Certified Special Education Teacher,
Licensed Educational Psychologist, or
School Psychologist (Credentialed)
Adaptive Behavior Licensed Educational Psychologist,
Certified Special Education Teacher,
School Psychologist (Credentialed),
Certified Behavior Specialist
Assistive Technology Certified Speech/Language Pathologist, or
Certified Special Education Teacher
Certified Assistive Technology Specialist
Auditory Acuity Licensed or Certified Audiologist
Auditory Perception (CAP) Licensed or Certified Audiologist,
Certified Speech/Language Pathologist, School
Psychologist (Credentialed)
Type of Assessment Qualifications
Cognitive Licensed Educational Psychologist,
School Psychologist (Credentialed)
Health Certificated School Nurse,
Licensed Public Health Nurse,
Licensed Physician
Motor Licensed Physical Therapist,
Registered Occupational Therapist,
Adapted Physical Education Specialist
(Credentialed)
Speech and Language Certificated Speech/Language Pathologist
Neuropsychological Board Certified Neuropsychologist
Social / Emotional / Behavioral School Psychologist (Credentialed),
Social Worker (LCSW or MSW),
Licensed Psychiatrist, or
Licensed Educational Psychologist,
Certified Behavioral Analyst
25
Functional Vision Certificated Teacher of the Visually Impaired
Visual-Motor Integration School Psychologist (Credentialed),
Licensed Educational Psychologist,
Occupational Therapist, certified
When insurance will cover all or part of the costs of the independent evaluation, the Charter
LEA/SELPA will request that the parents voluntarily have their insurance pay the independent
evaluation costs covered by their insurance; however, parents will not be asked to have
insurance cover independent evaluation costs if such action would result in a financial cost to
the parents not reimbursed by the Charter LEA/SELPA, including, but not limited to the
following:
A decrease in available lifetime coverage or any other benefit under an insurance
policy;
An increase in premiums or the discontinuance of the policy; or
An out-of-pocket expense such as payment of a deductible amount incurred in filing a
claim.
Independent evaluators must agree to release their assessment information, including
protocols, and results to the Charter LEA/SELPA prior to receipt of payment for services. The
results of the independent evaluation will be considered in the diagnosis, program decisions,
and placement of the student with disabilities as required by the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act and/or Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
SOURCES OF INDEPENDENT EVALUATION BY AREA OF ASSESSMENT
The following is a non-exclusive list of public agencies and private individuals who the Charter
LEA/SELPA has determined are qualified in their respective areas of assessment. The Charter
LEA/SELPA does not specifically endorse any listed agencies or individuals. Other agencies
and individuals will be considered if they meet Charter LEA/SELPA criteria. The Charter
LEA/SELPA may use these or other providers to obtain IEE at public expense:
Area of Assessment Source
Academic Achievement, Diagnostic Center of Northern California, California
Adaptive Behavior and Department of Education;
Cognitive Alta California Regional Center
Assistive Technology Center for Accessible Technology (www.cforat.org);
Partnership for Augmented Communication and
Technology (Catherine Simentelli, 415-519-3128);
Nettie Fischer, Assistive Technology Practitioner:
(916-686-1860
26
Auditory Acuity and Sutter Speech and Hearing
Central Auditory Processing (CAP)
Health (including Neurological) Shriner’s Hospital
Motor
Speech and Language Diagnostic Center of Northern California;
Sutter Speech and Hearing
Social / Emotional / Behavioral Diagnostic Center of Northern California
Functional Vision Berkeley School of Optometry
Approved Test Instruments
Test instruments as listed on the El Dorado County Charter Consortium SELPA’s Individual
Assessment Plan are approved for use in all Independent Educational Evaluations. Other
assessment instruments will be considered if they otherwise meet the Charter LEA/SELPA
criteria. The Charter LEA/SELPA may use the instruments on the assessment plan or other
assessment tools to provide an IEE at public expense.
IEP Forms
The basic IEP forms may be found at www.seis.org. The State Template is updated on a
regular basis. The most recent forms will be found there. IEPs for students who qualify for
services shall include but not be limited to:
1.) Demographic and Eligibility Information
2.) Transition Pages 1 & 2 (for students who will be 16 before their next IEP Meeting)
3.) Present Levels
4.) Special Factors
5.) Goals
6.) Services
7.) Educational Setting
8.) Parent Consent
9.) Meeting Notes
10.) Excusal form (if needed and agreed to by the parent)
11.) Post-Secondary Exit Forms (for students ready to exit high school)
12.) Behavior Support Plan (See PENT website for backup information: www.pent.gov
13.) Assessment Reports
27
In addition, the following forms and parent rights (located on page 28-42 of this document)
may be accessed electronically on the www.seis.org website:
Referral for Special Education
Parent Rights
Interim Administrative Placement
Triennial Reassessment Worksheet
Parent Information Request (Parent PIR)
Meeting Notice
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
CHAPTER II
INTERAGENCY REFERRAL
AND
PLACEMENT PROCEDURES
44
REFERRAL, PLACEMENT AND REVIEW OF PLACEMENT
PROCESS FOR STATE SCHOOLS
A. REFERRAL TO STATE SCHOOLS FOR FURTHER ASSESSMENT
1. Prior to referring a pupil for further assessment to California Schools for the Deaf or
Blind or the Diagnostic School or Diagnostic Center, assessments shall first be
conducted at the local level within the capabilities of the Charter LEA. Results of local
assessments shall accompany the referral request. The reason for the referral shall be
discussed with the parents.
2. The Schools for the Deaf and Blind, and the Diagnostic Schools shall conduct
assessments pursuant to the provisions of Education Code Section 56320.
3. A representative of the Charter LEA shall participate in the staffing meeting and shall
receive copies of the final report and recommendations. Conference calls may be
acceptable forms of participation, provided that written reports and
recommendations have been received by the Charter LEA representative prior to the
meeting.
B. PROCEDURES FOR REFERRAL TO STATE SCHOOLS FOR PLACEMENT
1. Referrals to state special schools for placement shall be made only as a result of
recommendations from the IEP team, upon determining that no appropriate
placement is available in the local plan area. Parents have the right to appeal any
decision of the IEP team, including whether their child should be referred to a state
special school.
2. Whenever a referral for placement is being considered to one of the state special
schools, the IEP team shall include a representative of the Charter LEA.
3. If the IEP team (including the representative from the Charter LEA) determines that a
referral to a state special school is appropriate, a case manager shall be designated to
coordinate the referral process.
4. As provided within Education Code Section 59300, the Charter LEA of
the parent or guardian of any pupil attending a state-operated school is responsible
for 10% of the excess cost of the placement. The cost for a student placed less than a
full year is prorated based on the number of days in attendance.
C. REVIEW OF PLACEMENTS MADE AT STATE SPECIAL SCHOOLS
1. The Charter LEA shall be notified of any upcoming review of students placed in state
special schools. The Charter LEA may request assistance from the County Office of
45
Education (if appropriate) in attending the review, considering assessment results or
any other activity needed.
REFERRAL AND PLACEMENT PROCESS FOR
NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS AND AGENCIES
Note: Before considering placement in a nonpublic, nonsectarian school, all public school
programs and modifications of service components must be explored.
1. The Charter LEA shall be responsible for conducting all assessment and convening the
IEP meeting. Prior to determining the need for a nonpublic school or agency
placement, the Charter LEA shall consult with the SELPA Director to determine if an
appropriate public education program is available and can be provided to the student.
2. Following determination by the individualized education program team that the pupil
requires nonpublic school or nonpublic agency placement, the Charter LEA shall:
In consultation with the parents and other public agencies which may have
financial responsibilities for the placement, select from the “Directory of Certified
Nonpublic School and Agencies” one or more nonpublic schools or agencies
certified by the Superintendent of Public Instruction for the purpose of
determining which nonpublic school or agency shall provide credentials, licenses
or other documents when requested by the Charter LEA to determine the ability of
the nonpublic school or agency to provide the services required by the
individualized education program.
Review the certificate issued to the nonpublic school or agency to determine
which services the school or agency is authorized to provide.
In consultation with the parent(s), select the nonpublic school or agency, which
gives evidence of the ability to implement the pupil’s individualized education
program. Consideration shall be given to the appropriate:
a. Nonpublic school or agency closest to the home of the pupil;
b. Nonpublic school or agency that can provide opportunities for interaction
with non-handicapped pupils to the extent appropriate;
c. Program with the lowest total cost, given two or more appropriate nonpublic
school or agency programs.
With the consent of the parent, provide the selected nonpublic school or agency
with current assessment data, the individualized education program, and all other
relevant information in the public record.
Contact the selected nonpublic school or agency to determine the nonpublic
school or agency’s interest and ability to implement the pupil’s individualized
education program.
Invite the identified and selected nonpublic school or agency representatives to
participate in the finalization of the individualized education program.
46
Ensure that after placement, the appropriate nonpublic school or agency
personnel participate in subsequent meetings of the IEP team. Review of the
pupil’s IEP shall be conducted at least annually by the public education agency. The
public education agency shall ensure that review schedules are specified in the IEP
and contract for the pupil.
An elementary Charter LEA shall notify a high school district of all pupils placed in
nonpublic school or agency programs prior to the annual review of the IEP for each
pupil who is age appropriate to transfer to the high school district.
When an individual with exceptional needs meets public education agency
requirements for completion of prescribed course of study and graduation
requirements, the public education agency that developed the IEP shall award the
diploma.
3. A master contract shall be used for contracting purposes. The term of the contract
shall not exceed one year. The contract shall specify the administrative and financial
agreements between the Charter LEA and the nonpublic school or agency.
The nonpublic school or agency shall not charge parents for services covered in the
contract with the public education agency. No contract with the public education
agency shall be contingent upon nonpublic school or agency individual contracts or
agreements with parents.
If specified in the contract, the nonpublic school may subcontract with other State-
certified agencies for services.
The contracting Charter LEA and nonpublic school or agency shall notify parents of
their responsibility to report each change in residence. Such notice by the
contracting Charter LEA shall be in writing and given at the time nonpublic school
or agency placement is recommended at the IEP. The notice may be documented
in the minutes of the IEP. Such notice shall include an explanation that the
contract for services is between the contracting Charter LEA and nonpublic school
or agency and obligates no other public agency in the event of a residence change.
When the parents of an individual receiving services under this article change
residences, and such change constitutes a change of public education agencies,
the following shall occur:
a. The parent shall immediately report the change of residence to the
administrator of both the former and new public school and the
nonpublic school or nonpublic agency. Parents must be notified of this
obligation at the IEP meeting in which a nonpublic school is
recommended. Notification of this obligation should be documented in the
minutes of the IEP meeting.
b. The contracting nonpublic school or nonpublic agency shall immediately
notify the Charter LEA.
c. The Charter LEA making payment to the nonpublic school or agency shall
immediately notify the new public education agency of the individual’s change
of residence. This notice shall include a copy of the individual’s records,
47
including the IEP and the contract for services with the nonpublic school or
nonpublic agency.
The pupil’s individualized program shall be reviewed by the new public education
agency as soon as possible. The new public education agency may make an interim
placement if it has a comparable public school program that it reasonably believes
can meet the student’s needs for services, including frequency and other
considerations as identified in the student’s IEP, or it may allow the student to
remain at the nonpublic school or agency during the time necessary to complete
the IEP review.
a. If the student was placed in a nonpublic school as a residential student, the
placing Charter LEA is responsible for the placement costs through the end of
the current school year. However, if the student was placed in a nonpublic
school as an educational placement only, the cost of the placement becomes
the responsibility of the LEA in which the parents now reside if the student is
disenrolled from the Charter LEA.
The following factors shall be considered by the IEP team in determining the
continued appropriateness of the nonpublic school or agency:
a. No appropriate public education program is available.
b. To move the individual at the time of the change of residence would be
harmful to the health, welfare or educational progress of the individual.
c. The nonpublic school or agency continues to be within a reasonable distance
and /or travel time from the home of the individual.
d. Other contingencies, which necessitate the individual remaining at the
nonpublic school as determined by the IEP team.
If the individual remains in the nonpublic school or agency during the period
required to review the pupil’s IEP, and the individual is registered in the new public
education agency, the per diem rate in effect in the prior Master Contract shall be
honored by the receiving public education agency and continued until a new
contract is negotiated. (For specifics refer to the Master Contract).
After the review has been conducted and if the IEP team determines that no
appropriate public education program is available, the new public education
agency shall negotiate a new contract for nonpublic school services.
PLACEMENT PROCESS FOR OUT OF STATE NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS
Every effort should be made to locate programs within the state before going outside of
California. Should an IEP team determine that the only appropriate placement for a pupil is in
an out of state facility, documentation of these efforts must be reviewed by the SELPA
Director.
48
CHAPTER III
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
49
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
(In this section, C.C.R. refers to the California Code of Regulations;
C.F.R. refers to the Code of Federal Regulations)
NOTE: According to Supplement 1 [Assembly Bill 1663 (Evans & Romero) effective October
10, 2007], Section 56329 of the Education Code is amended to read:
56329(a)(2) In making a determination of eligibility under paragraph (1), a pupil shall not,
pursuant to Section 1414(b)(5)of Title 20 of the United States Code, and Section
300.306(b) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, be determined to be an
individual with exceptional needs if the determinant factor for the determination is of the
following in subparagraphs (A) to (C), inclusive, plus subparagraph (D):
(A) Lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of
reading instruction as defined in Section 6388(3) of Title 20 of the United States
Code.
(B) Lack of appropriate instruction in mathematics.
(C) Limited-English proficiency.
(D) If the pupil does not otherwise meet the eligibility criteria under Section
300.8(a) of Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
A. Overview of Eligibility Criteria
1. A pupil shall qualify as an individual with exceptional needs pursuant to Section 56026
of the Education Code if the results of the assessment demonstrate that the degree of
the pupil’s impairment requires special education in one or more of the program
options authorized by Section 56361 of the Education Code. Program options include,
but are not limited to: Regular Education Programs; Designated Instruction and
Service; Resource Specialist; Special Day Class; Nonpublic and/or State Schools;
Instruction in settings other than classrooms where specially designed instruction may
occur; Itinerant instruction in classrooms, resource rooms and settings other than
classrooms where specially designed instruction may occur to the extent required by
federal law or regulation; and Instruction using telecommunication, and instruction in
the home, in hospitals, and in other institutions to the extent required by federal law
or regulation.
2. The IEP team, including assessment personnel, shall make the decision as to whether
or not the assessment results demonstrate that the degree of the student’s
impairment requires special education.
3. The IEP team shall take into account all of the relevant material which is available on
the student.
4. No single score or product of scores shall be used as the sole criterion for the decision
of the IEP team as to the student’s eligibility for special education.
5. After the IEP team determines eligibility based on the criteria specified in Title V of the
California Code of Regulations, a program recommendation is made based on the
50
needs of the student and the goals and objectives developed by the IEP team. The IEP
team is required to consider all program options with an emphasis on placement in
the least restrictive environment.
NOTE: See C.C.R. Title 5, Section 3030 (Eligibility Criteria)
B. The following eligibility categories are identified in C.C.R. Title 5, Section 3030:
1. Mental Retardation (MR)
2. Hard of Hearing (HH)
3. Deafness (DEAF)
4a. Speech or Language Impairment - Articulation Disorder (SLI)
4b. Speech or Language Impairment - Abnormal Voice (SLI)
4c. Speech or Language Impairment - Fluency Disorder (SLI)
4d. Speech or Language Impairment - Language Disorder (SLI)
5. Visual Impairment (VI)
6. Emotional Disturbance (ED)
7. Orthopedic Impairment (OI)
8. Other Health Impairment (OHI)
9. Specific Learning Disability (SLD)
10. Deaf-Blindness (DB)
11. Multiple Disabilities (MD)
11. Autism (AUT)
12. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
1. Mental Retardation (MR) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(h): A pupil has significantly below average general intellectual
functioning existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested
during the developmental period, which adversely affect a pupil’s educational
performance.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Section 300.8(c)(6) “Mental retardation means
significantly sub average general intellectual functioning, existing concurrently with
deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental period, that
adversely affects a child’s educational performance.”
51
2. Hard of Hearing (HH) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(a): A pupil has a hearing impairment whether permanent or
fluctuating, which impairs the processing of linguistic information through hearing,
even with amplification, and which adversely affects educational performance.
Processing linguistic information includes speech and language reception and speech
and language discrimination.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having a hearing
impairment…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Section300.8(c)(5) “Hearing impairment means an
impairment in hearing, whether permanent or fluctuating, that adversely affects a
child’s educational performance but that is not included under the definition of
deafness in this section.”
Please refer to “Programs for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students, Guidelines for
Quality Standards”, for specific information on assessment of students in this
category of disability. Published by the California Department of Education, this
document can be found online at:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ss/dh/documents/proguidlns.pdf .
3. Deafness (DEAF) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(a): A pupil has a hearing impairment whether permanent or
fluctuating, which impairs the processing of linguistic information through hearing
even with amplification, and which adversely affects educational performance.
Processing linguistic information includes speech and language reception and speech
and language discrimination.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having a hearing impairment
(“including deafness)…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and
related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(3) Deafness means a hearing
impairment that is so severe that the child is impaired in processing linguistic
information through hearing, with or without amplification that adversely affects a
child’s educational performance.”
52
Please refer to “Programs for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students, Guidelines for
Quality Standards”, for specific information on assessment of students in this
category of disability. Published by the California Department of Education, this
document can be found online at:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ss/dh/documents/proguidlns.pdf .
4. Speech or Language Impairment-General Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec.3030(c): A pupil has a language or speech disorder as defined in
Section 56333 of the Education Code, and it is determined that the pupil's disorder
meets one or more of the following criteria:” (See 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d below.)
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having a speech or language
impairment…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Section 300.8(c)(11) “Speech or language
impairment means a communication disorder, such as stuttering, impaired
articulation, a language impairment, or a voice impairment, that adversely affects a
child’s educational performance.”
NOTE: As cited in California Education Code 56333, “A pupil shall be assessed as
having a language or speech disorder which makes him or her eligible for special
education and related services when he or she demonstrates difficulty understanding
or using spoken language to such an extent that it adversely affects his or her
educational performance and cannot be corrected without special education and
related services. In order to be eligible for special education and related services
difficulty in understanding or using spoken language shall be assessed by a language,
speech, and hearing specialist who determines that such difficulty results from any of
the following disorders:
(a) Articulation disorders, such that the pupil’s production of speech significantly
interferes with communication and attracts adverse attention.
(b) Abnormal voice, characterized by persistent, defective voice quality, pitch, or
loudness. An appropriate medical examination shall be conducted, where
appropriate.
(c) Fluency difficulties which result in an abnormal flow of verbal expression to
such a degree that these difficulties adversely affect communication between
the pupil and listener.
(d) Inappropriate or inadequate acquisition, comprehension, or expression of
spoken language such that the pupil’s language performance level is found to
be significantly below the language performance level of his or her peers.
53
(e) Hearing loss which results in a language or speech disorder and significantly
affects educational performance.”
4a. Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Articulation Disorder - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Section 3030 (c)(1)(A) The pupil displays reduced intelligibility or an
inability to use the speech mechanism which significantly interferes with
communication and attracts adverse attention. Significant interference in
communication occurs when the pupil’s production of single or multiple speech
sounds on a developmental scale of articulation competency is below that expected
for his or her chronological age or developmental level, and which adversely affects
educational performance. (B) A pupil does not meet the criteria for articulation
disorder if the sole assessed disability is an abnormal swallowing pattern.
4b. Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Abnormal Voice - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Section 3030(c)(2): A pupil has an abnormal voice which is characterized
by persistent, defective voice quality, pitch or loudness.
4c. Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Fluency Disorder - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Section 3030(c)(3): A pupil has a fluency disorder when the flow of
verbal expression including rate and rhythm adversely affects communication
between the pupil and listener.
4d. Speech or Language Impairment (SLI) - Language Disorder - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(c)(4): The pupil has an expressive or receptive language
disorder when he or she meets one of the following criteria:
(A) The pupil scores at least 1.5 standard deviations below the mean, or below the 7
th
percentile, for his or her chronological age or development level on two or more
standardized tests in one or more of the following areas of language development:
morphology, syntax, semantics or pragmatics. When standardized tests are
considered to be invalid for the specific pupil, the expected language performance
level shall be determined by alternative means as specified on the assessment
plan, or
(B) The pupil scores at least 1.5 standard deviations below the mean or the score is
below the 7
th
percentile for his or her chronological age or developmental level on
one or more standardized tests in one or the areas listed in Subsection (A) and
displays inappropriate or inadequate usage of expressive or receptive language as
54
measured by a representative spontaneous or elicited language sample of a
minimum of fifty utterances. The language sample must be recorded or
transcribed and analyzed, and the results included in the assessment report. If the
pupil is unable to produce this sample, the language, speech and hearing specialist
shall document why a fifty utterance sample was not obtainable and the contexts
in which attempts were made to elicit the sample. When standardized tests are
considered to be invalid for the specific pupil, the expected language performance
level shall be determined by alternative means as specified in the assessment plan.
5. Visual Impairment (VI) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(d): A pupil has a visual impairment which, even with
correction, adversely affects a pupil’s educational performance.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having a visual impairment
(including blindness)…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and
related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(13) Visual impairment including
blindness means an impairment in vision that, even with correction, adversely affects
a child’s educational performance. The term includes both partial sight and blindness.
Please refer to “Program Guidelines for Students Who Are Visually Impaired”
published by the California Department of Education for specific information on
assessments for visually impaired students’ eligibility criteria.
http://www2.cde.ca.gov/scripts/texis.exe/webinator/search?pr=default&prox=page&
rorder=750&rprox=750&rdfreq=250&rwfreq=0&rlead=750&sufs=1&order=r&rdepth=
0&query=VI+guidelines&cq=
6. Emotional Disturbance (ED) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(i): Because of a serious emotional disturbance, a pupil exhibits
one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a
marked degree, which adversely affect educational performance:
(1) An inability to learn which cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory or health
factors.
(2) An inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers
and teachers.
(3) Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances
exhibited in several situations.
(4) A general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression.
55
(5) A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or
school problems.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having a serious emotional
disturbance (referred to in this part as ‘emotional disturbance’)…and who, by reason
thereof, needs special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(14)(ii) “Emotional disturbance
includes schizophrenia. The term does not apply to children who are socially
maladjusted, unless it is determined that they have an emotional disturbance under
paragraph (c)(4)(i)of this section.”
7. Orthopedic Impairment (OI) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(e): A pupil has a severe orthopedic impairment which
adversely affects the pupil’s educational performance. Such orthopedic impairments
include impairments caused by congenital anomaly, impairments caused by disease,
and impairments from other causes.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having an orthopedic
impairment…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(8) “Orthopedic impairment means a
severe orthopedic impairment that adversely affects a child’s educational
performance. The term includes impairments cause by a congenital anomaly,
impairments caused by disease (e.g., poliomyelitis, bone tuberculosis), and
impairments from other causes (e.g., cerebral palsy, amputations and fractures or
burns that cause contractures).”
8. Other Health Impairment (OHI) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(e): A pupil has limited strength, vitality, or alertness, due to
chronic or acute health problems including but not limited to a heart condition,
cancer, leukemia, rheumatic fever, chronic kidney disease, cystic fibrosis, severe
asthma, epilepsy, lead poisoning, diabetes, tuberculosis and other communicable
infectious disease, and hematological disorders such as sickle cell anemia and
hemophilia which adversely affect a pupil’s educational performance. In accordance
with Section 56026(e) of the Education Code, such physical disabilities shall not be
temporary in nature as defined by Section 3001(v).
56
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having an other health
impairment…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related
services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(9)”Other health impairment means
having limited strength, vitality, or alertness, including a heightened alertness to
environmental stimuli, that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational
environment, that—
(i) Is due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma,* attention deficit
disorder or *attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart
condition, hemophilia, lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis, rheumatic fever, sickle cell
anemia, and Tourette syndrome; and
(ii) Adversely affects a child’s educational performance.”
*See Appendix to Chapter III for Attention Deficit Disorder Guidelines.
9. Specific Learning Disability (SLD) - Eligibility Summary
NOTE: Federal Law (IDEA 2004) and the California Education Code differ in their
definitions of Specific Learning Disability from that which is currently found in the
California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 3030 (as listed in Barclays Official
California Code of Regulations dated 11/23/2007).
Both of the above references are included in this Procedural Guide. Until the State of
California decides how RtI (Response to Intervention) will be utilized as a determiner
of Specific Learning Disability, Charter LEAs need to consider both the discrepancy
model and the RtI model in determining eligibility for special education under this
disability category.
Eligibility—(Discrepancy Model)
California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 3030(j) (as listed in Barclays Official
California Code of Regulations dated 11/23/2007:)
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(j): A pupil has a disorder in one or more of the basic
psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or
written, which may manifest itself in an impaired ability to listen, think, speak, read,
write, spell, or do mathematical calculations, and has a severe discrepancy between
intellectual ability and achievement in one or more of the academic areas specified in
Section 56337(a) of the Education Code. For the purpose of Section 3030(j):
57
(1) Basic psychological processes include attention, visual processing, auditory
processing, sensory-motor skills, cognitive abilities including association,
conceptualization and expression.
(2) Intellectual ability includes both acquired learning and learning potential and shall
be determined by a systematic assessment of intellectual functioning.
(3) The level of achievement includes the pupil’s level of competence in materials and
subject matter explicitly taught in school and shall be measured by standardized
achievement tests.
(4) The decision as to whether or not a severe discrepancy exists shall be made by the
individualized education program team, including assessment personnel in
accordance with Section 56341(d), which takes into account all relevant material
which is available on the pupil. No single score or product of scores, test or
procedure shall be used as the sole criterion for the decisions of the individualized
education program team as to the pupil’s eligibility for special education. In
determining the existence of a severe discrepancy, the individualized education
program team shall use the following procedures:
(A) When standardized tests are considered to be valid for a specific pupil, a severe
discrepancy is demonstrated by: first, converting into common standard
scores, using a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15, the achievement
test score and the ability test score to be compared; second, computing the
difference between these common standard scores; and third, comparing this
computed difference to the standard criterion which is the product of 1.5
multiplied by the standard deviation of the distribution of computed
differences of students taking these achievement and ability tests. A computed
difference which equals or exceeds this standard criterion, adjusted by one
standard error measurement, the adjustment not to exceed 4 common
standard score points, indicates a severe discrepancy when such discrepancy is
corroborated by other assessment data which may include other tests, scales,
instruments, observations and work samples, as appropriate.
(B) When standardized tests are considered to be invalid for a specific pupil, the
discrepancy shall be measured by alternative means as specified on the
assessment plan.
(C) If the standardized test do not reveal a severe discrepancy as defined in
subparagraphs (A) or (B) above, the individualized education program team
may find that a severe discrepancy does exist, provided that the team
documents in a written report that the severe discrepancy between ability and
58
achievement exists as a result of a disorder in one or more of the basic
psychological processes. The report shall include a statement of the area, the
degree, and the basis and method used in determining the discrepancy. The
report shall contain information considered by the team which shall include,
but not be limited to:
1. Data obtained from standardized assessment instruments;
2. Information provided by the parent;
3. Information provided by the pupil’s present teacher;
4. Evidence of the pupil’s performance in the regular and/or special education
classroom obtained from observations, work samples, and group test
scores;
5. Consideration of the pupils age, particularly for young children; and
6. Any additional relevant information.
(5) The discrepancy shall not be primarily the result of limited school experience or
poor school attendance.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(a) “Child with a disability means those children
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.530-300.534 as having…specific learning disability…and
who because of those impairments need special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(10):
(i), the term “Specific Learning Disability” includes such conditions as “perceptual disabilities,
brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.”
(ii) Disorders not included. “Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that
are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of
emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
Eligibility—“RTI Model”
California Education Code 56337:
(a) A specific learning disability, as defined in paragraph (3) of Section 1401 of Title 20
of the United States Code, means a disorder in one or more of the basic
59
psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or
written, which may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak,
read, write, spell, or perform mathematical calculations. The term “specific
learning disability” includes conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury,
minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. That term does
not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual, hearing, or
motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of
environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law and pursuant to paragraph (6) of
Section 1414 of Title 20 of the United States Code, in determining whether a pupil
has a specific learning disability as defined in subdivision (a), a local educational
agency is not required to take into consideration whether a pupil has a severe
discrepancy between achievement and intellectual expression, basic reading skill,
reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning.
(c) In determining whether a pupil has a specific learning disability, a local
educational agency may use a process that determines if the pupil responds to
scientific, research-based intervention as a part of the assessment procedures
described in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b) of Section 1414 of Title 20 of
the United States Code.
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(a) “Child with a disability means those children
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.530-300.534 as having…specific learning disability…and
who because of those impairments need special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(10):
(i), the term “Specific Learning Disability” includes such conditions as “perceptual disabilities,
brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.”
(ii) Disorders not included. “Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that
are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of
emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.
10. Deaf-Blindness (DB) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(b): A pupil has concomitant hearing and visual impairments,
the combination of which causes severe communication, developmental and
educational problems.
60
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having concomitant hearing
and visual impairments …and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and
related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(2), “Deaf-blindness means concomitant
hearing and visual impairments, the combination of which causes such severe
communication and other developmental and educational needs that they cannot be
accommodated in special education programs solely for children with deafness or
children with blindness.”
11. Multiple Disabilities (MD) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(h): “A pupil has significantly below average general intellectual
functioning existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested
during the developmental period, which adversely affect a pupil’s educational
performance.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having multiple disabilities…and
who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Section 300.8(c)(7), “Multiple disabilities means
concomitant impairments (such as mental retardation-blindness or mental
retardation-orthopedic impairment), the combination of which causes such severe
educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in special education programs
solely for one of the impairments. Multiple disabilities does not include deaf-
blindness.”
12. Autism (AUT) - Eligibility Summary
C.C.R. Title 5, Sec. 3030(g): “A pupil exhibits any combination of the following autistic-
like behaviors, to include but not be limited to: (1) An inability to use oral language for
appropriate communication; (2) A history of extreme withdrawal or relating to people
inappropriately and continued impairment in social interaction from infancy through
early childhood; (3) An obsession to maintain sameness; (4) Extreme preoccupation
with objects or inappropriate use of objects or both; (5) Extreme resistance to
controls; (6) Displays peculiar motoric mannerisms and motility patterns; (7) Self-
stimulating, ritualistic behavior.”
61
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8 “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having autism…and who, by
reason thereof, needs special education and related services.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(c)(1):
(i)”Autism means a developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and
nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age
three, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. Other
characteristics often associated with autism are engagement in repetitive activities
and stereotyped movements, resistance to environmental change or change in
daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences.
(ii) Autism does not apply if a child’s educational performance is adversely affected
primarily because the child has an emotional disturbance, as define in paragraph
(c)(4) of this section.
(iii)A child who manifests the characteristics of autism after age three could be
identified as having autism if the criteria in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section are
satisfied.”
13. Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) - Eligibility Summary
34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(12): “Traumatic Brain Injury means an acquired injury to
the brain caused by an external physical force, resulting in total or partial functional
disability or psychosocial impairment, or both, that adversely affects a child’s
educational performance. The term applies to open or closed head injuries resulting in
impairments in one or more areas such as cognition; language; memory; attention;
reasoning; abstract thinking; judgment; problem-solving; sensory, perceptual and
motor abilities; psychosocial behavior; physical functions; information processing; and
speech. Traumatic brain injury does not apply to brain injuries that are congenital or
degenerative, or brain injuries induced by birth trauma.”
NOTE: As cited in 34 C.F.R. Part 300 Sec. 300.8(1) “Child with a disability means a child
evaluated in accordance with Sec. 300.304-300.311 as having traumatic brain
injury…and who, by reason thereof, needs special education and related services.”
62
Appendix to Chapter III
63
ATTENTION DEFICIT DISORDER GUIDELINES
A student whose educational performance is adversely affected by a suspected or diagnosed
attention deficit disorder or attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and after other
interventions have proven unsuccessful, may meet eligibility requirements under the following
categories:
Specific Learning Disability [SLD] with a significant discrepancy between ability and
achievement and a deficit in attention which is one of the five basic psychological
processes; or
Emotionally Disturbed [ED] when the lack of attention is causing a severe emotional
condition so pervasive that it adversely affects educational performance; or
Other Health Impaired [OHI] when a student has a limited alertness due to ADD/ADHD
as a chronic, acute health problem which adversely affects educational performance.
The purpose of this document is to clarify how Charter LEAs should apply OHI eligibility criteria
as outlined in the 2003 document published by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs
(OSEP) entitled, Identifying and Treating Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: A Resource for
School and Home, in regard to students with suspected ADD/ADHD.
“In order to receive special education and related services under Part B of IDEA, a child must be
evaluated to determine (A) whether he or she has a disability, and (B) whether he or she,
because of the disability, needs special education and related services. The initial evaluation
must be a full and individual evaluation that assesses the child in all areas related to the
suspected disability and uses a variety of assessment tools and strategies.
A) Identification of the disability ADD/ADHD: The criteria set forth by the
fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)
are used as the standardized clinical definition to determine the presence of ADHD
(see DSM-IV Criteria for ADHD). A person must exhibit several characteristics to be
clinically diagnosed as having ADHD:
Severity. The behavior in question must occur more frequently in the child
than in other children at the same developmental stage.
Early onset. At least some of the symptoms must have been present prior to
age seven.
Duration. The symptoms must also have been present for at least six months
prior to the evaluation.
Impact. The symptoms must have a negative impact on the child’s academic
or social life.
Settings. The symptoms must be present in multiple settings.
64
B) Need for Special Education and Related Services: The need for Special
Education and Related Services is determined by the adverse affect of the disability on
educational performance, despite consistently applied and documented regular
education accommodations*. Adverse affect on educational performance must be
demonstrated (documentation needed) by the pervasive** nature of three of the
following:
(1) The student is not making satisfactory progress towards grade level
standards.
(2) On grade reports, there is an overall pattern of poor or failing grades
(equivalent of D’s or F’s) present for at least six months.
(3) Quality and degree of task completion is significantly below the range
of the class.
(4) On standardized achievement tests, the student demonstrates a
significant difference between ability and achievement.
The relationship between the above indicators and ADD/ADHD should be documented in the
IEP.
Even if a student has symptoms of ADD/ADHD, the IEP Team should attempt to differentiate
indicators that would be more closely associated with substance abuse, mood disorders (i.e.:
anxiety/depression), conduct disorders and oppositional defiant disorder from those that are
primarily the result of the ADD/ADHD condition. Although these conditions may coexist, the IEP
Team should attempt to identify the cause/effect relationship each of these conditions may be
having on the student’s academic achievement level, basic skill development, and social
functioning in order to make proper eligibility decisions and to design effective intervention
strategies.
*general education accommodations may include the following as examples: extra time for
assignments or tests, repeated directions, note takers, alternate responses for class work or
tests, preferential seating, abbreviated assignments.
**pervasive is defined as present in over 80% of subjects and across various types of
assignments and settings (individual seat work, cooperative learning, written and oral work,
and timed tests, etc.).
Adopted by El Dorado County SELPA Steering Committee, September 15, 2004.
65
CHAPTER IV
DUE PROCESS HEARING
AND
COMPLAINT PROCEDURES
66
Due Process Hearing
Under IDEA, due process hearings are the principal vehicle for resolving disputes between
parents of children with disabilities and Charter LEAs concerning identification, evaluation,
placement or provisions of FAPE. Parents, students who have reached the age of majority and
Charter LEAs are the only parties who may request a due process hearing. A Charter LEA may
initiate due process in the following instances:
1. Parents refuse to consent to an action for which parental consent is required
2. When a Charter LEA is aware that a parent disagrees with the placement
3. In response to a parent request for a publicly funded Independent Educational
Evaluation (IEE)
4. In the event a multidisciplinary team can not agree on any aspect of a student’s
educational program, including placement, and the Charter LEA requests that a
hearing officer design the IEP
Due process procedures include the option of a mediation conference, the right to examine
pupil records, and the right to a fair and impartial administrative hearing at the state level.
Specific procedures and timelines are delineated in the following pages to assist you in
complying with legal requirements.
The El Dorado County Charter SELPA is implementing a local mediation process following
extensive training in alternative dispute resolution as an alternative to formal mediation and
fair hearing. This local alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process seeks to build positive
relationships, encourages flexibility and creative problem solving and promotes a sense of
ownership in the outcome. Parents may opt to meet with a “solutions panel” comprised of
parents and educators to resolve the issue(s) of concern. This process does not preclude the
option of formal mediation or fair hearing, but is offered as a positive alternative. For more
information on the ADR process, contact the SELPA office at (530) 295-2289.
To initiate a due process hearing, the parents or public educational agency files a written
request with the Office of Administrative Hearings. The requesting party also submits a copy
of the hearing request to the other party. The hearing is to be completed and a decision
reached within 45 days from receipt of the request, unless a continuance has been granted. If
both parties agree to a mediation conference, it is held and completed within 15 days after
hearing receipt. If the parties then proceed to the due process hearing, it is held and
completed within 30 days after the mediation conference is held. To file for mediation or a
due process hearing, contact:
Office of Administrative Hearings
Special Education Division
2349 Gateway Oaks, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95833-4231
Telephone: 926-263-0880; Fax: 916-263-0890
67
Note: These timelines are important to the outcome of the hearing. Often when timelines
are violated, a hearing is lost based on a denial of due process rather than on the issues.
Nothing in the due process procedures described in this chapter is to be construed as
prohibiting or preventing the parent and the public education agency from meeting
informally and resolving any issue or issues of concern.
EVENT
PROCEDURES
DOCUMENTATION
1.
INITIATING A DUE PROCESS HEARING
If any parent desires a due process hearing on any
educational decision by a Charter LEA, covered under due
process guidelines (Ed.Code §56501), parent submits
written hearing request to Office of Administrative Hearings
and the Charter LEA.
Receipt of due process
hearing request
If the hearing request is submitted to the Charter LEA, the
request is immediately forwarded to the Office of
Administrative Hearings (OAH) who informs both parties of
request receipt and schedules a mediation conference
which can be waived by either party.
Reply letter informs
parent/Charter LEA of
informal review, ADR,
Resolution Session,
mediation conference
and due process
hearing.
OAH determines if the complaint meets the requirements
of IDEA 2004: (1) child’s name, address and school of
attendance; (2) a description of the problem with specific
related facts; and (3) a proposed resolution with specific
related facts.
Within 15 days of
receipt of complaint,
either schedule a
Resolution Session or
file a motion to
dismiss the complaint
(if the Charter LEA
deems the complaint
to be insufficient).
If the complaint is deemed to be valid, the Charter LEA
must, within 10 calendar days, provide a written response
to the complaint which specifically addresses: (1) why the
action subject to dispute was proposed or rejected; (2)
includes a description of the other options considered and
the reason for rejection; (3) the basis of the action; and (4)
all relevant factors related to the decision.
Written response to
parent
If the Charter LEA requests a hearing, the chairperson of the
IEP Team informs parent and forwards written hearing
request to the OAH, who informs both parties of request
receipt and schedules mediation conference which can be
waived by either party.
Written
communication from
the Charter LEA with
both parent and OAH
68
Schedule a Resolution Session within 15 days of receipt of
the complaint.
Notice to parent and
other attendees of
proposed Resolution
Session
2.
INFORMAL REVIEW
In the interest of avoiding a costly due process hearing,
administrator or designee may meet informally with
parents as soon as possible after receipt of hearing request
to resolve parent concerns.
Notification of
informal review
Schedule IEP team meeting, if needed, to document
program change.
IEP; Results of
informal review
If parent concern(s) is unresolved, administrator or
designee may inform parent: (1) that Charter LEA will
participate in a Resolution Session; (2) that Charter LEA
waives the mediation conference and is proceeding directly
to the due process hearing before State Hearing Officer.
Notification of
Resolution Session or
intent to proceed to
due process hearing.
3.
RESOLUTION SESSION
The Charter LEA is required to schedule a resolution session
within 15 days of their receipt of the complaint. This
resolution session must include the parents, an
administrator, and relevant members of the IEP team. The
purpose of this session is to foster early resolution of
special education disputes. Attorneys are not permitted,
unless the parent brings an attorney. If a parent brings an
attorney, that attorney is not entitled to recover fees for
attending the resolution session. The resolution session is
like mediation, without the assistance of a mediator. Any
information discussed at that meeting is confidential. The
outcome of the resolution session should be a legally
binding settlement agreement.
Notification of
Resolution Session
Documentation of
Resolution Agreement
Schedule IEP team meeting, if needed, to document
program change.
IEP
If parent concern(s) is unresolved, administrator or
designee may inform parent: 1) that Charter LEA will
participate in mediation conference; or 2) that Charter LEA
waives the mediation conference and is proceeding directly
to the due process hearing before State Hearing Officer.
Letter to parent with
decision to participate
in Mediation or in due
process hearing.
If agreement is reached at the Resolution Session, OAH
must be notified to remove the matter from hearing. If
agreement is not reached, the matter will proceed to
mediation and/or hearing.
Letter to OAH to
remove matter from
hearing
69
4.
MEDIATION CONFERENCE
Mediation conference is held if Charter LEA or parents do
not waive conference.
Reply letter from OAH
informs parent and
Charter LEA regarding
mediation conference
and due process
hearing.
If the parties to the mediation come to agreement, the
decisions are documented in the mediation agreement.
An IEP team meeting is scheduled as soon as possible to
incorporate these agreements into the IEP.
Completed mediation
conference form
documents action
taken
IEP
If parent concern(s) is unresolved, OAH lists unresolved
issue(s) as basis for due process hearing and sets hearing
date and place convenient for both parties.
Completed mediation
conference
documents unresolved
issues.
5.
DUE PROCESS HEARING
Hearing must be completed within 30 days after mediation
conference or within 45 days after receipt of hearing
request if mediation conference is waived.
OAH Process;
Assignment of date,
time, place by OAH
OAH assigns Hearing Officer who is knowledgeable of
administrative hearing procedure.
All evidence (written and list of witnesses) exchanged by
parent and Charter LEA 5 days prior to hearing
All Documentation
Hearing proceedings must be recorded verbatim and both
parties given access to the recording.
Hearing admits any relevant evidence on which responsible
persons are accustomed to rely in conduct of serious affairs;
all testimony under oath or affirmation.
Hearing is conducted in English with interpreter when
necessary.
Decision written in English and, as appropriate, the primary
language of parent and mailed to both parties to the
hearing.
Completed decision
form
Both parties given notice of rights and explanation of
procedure for appealing hearing decision to court of
competent jurisdiction.
Notification of appeal
rights
70
***See the Appendix to this chapter for:
1. “Special Education Due Process Hearings Procedural Safeguards” from the Office of
Administrative Hearings
2. “El Dorado County Charter SELPA Resolution Session Process”
EVENT
PROCEDURES
DOCUMENTATION
6.
STUDENT PLACEMENT DURING HEARING (STAY PUT)
During the hearing proceedings, the student is to remain
in his or her present educational placement unless the
public education agency and the parent agree
otherwise. Present educational placement is usually
defined as the current education and related services
provided in accordance with the most recently approved
IEP. A student applying for initial admission to a Charter
LEA, shall, with consent of the parents, be placed in the
public school program until the completion of all
proceedings.
IEP and OAH Decision
7.
IEP REVIEWS
A Charter LEA must keep its proposed educational
planning for a student current during the hearing
process so that it remains ready to serve the student
whenever he or she returns to the public Charter LEA.
This means that a Charter LEA must continue to offer
FAPE by developing and reviewing annual IEPs while
litigation is pending, even though the parents may not
consent.
IEP
8.
IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION OF THE HEARING
OFFICER
If a Charter LEA does not intend to appeal the decision
made in a due process hearing, it should implement the
decision as soon as possible, and in any event, within a
reasonable amount of time.
Written Decision from
OAH
71
California Department of Education Complaint Procedures
Any individual, public agency or organization may file a written complaint with the
superintendent of the concerned local public education agency alleging a matter, which if
true, would constitute a violation by that public education agency of a federal or state law or
regulation governing special education and related services. In some instances, the complaint
may be filed directly with the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. (see CCR 4650). For
complaints relating to special education, the following shall be conditions for direct state
intervention if the complainant alleges:
1. A public agency, other than an LEA fails or refuses to comply with an applicable law
or regulation relating to the provision of FAPE.
2. The LEA or public agency fails or refuses to comply with the due process procedures
or failed or refused to implement a due process hearing order.
3. Facts that indicate that the child or group of children may be in immediate physical
danger or that the health, safety or welfare of a child or group of children is
threatened.
4. That a student is not receiving the special education or related services specified in
his or her IEP.
5. The complaint involves a violation of federal law governing special education.
If the complainant files a complaint directly with the State, they shall identify the basis upon
which the direct filing is being made.
Each person or organization filing a complaint shall specify all relevant facts in their
possession and provide any additional information that the complainant believes will support
the complaint.
The public education agency shall annually notify individuals of their local educational agency
complaint procedures and of their right to a hearing regarding the complaint. The notice shall
include the identities of the person responsible for processing complaints, the civil remedies
available and of the appeal and review procedures.
Local Complaint Procedures
When a complaint is filed directly with the local educational agency, the Charter LEA shall
complete the following within 60 days from receipt of the complaint:
1. Investigate the complaint. The investigation shall provide an opportunity for the
complainant, or the complainant’s representative, and local educational agency
representatives to present information relevant to the complaint. The
72
investigation may include an opportunity for the parties to meet to discuss the
complaint or question each other’s witnesses.
2. Prepare a report of the facts, findings and disposition of the complaint and
rationale for such disposition. The report shall include corrective actions (if any).
3. Provide a copy of the report to the complainant, together with a copy of the
complainant’s right to appeal the Charter LEA’s decision to the Department of
Education.
Charter LEAs may establish procedures for attempting to resolve complaints through
mediation prior to the initiation of a formal compliance investigation. Conducting local
mediation shall not extend the local timelines for investigating and resolving complaints at
the local level, unless the complainant agrees, in writing, to the extension of the timeline. In
no event shall mediation be mandatory in resolving complaints.
If the Local Educational Agency Decision is appealed to the state level, the LEA shall forward
the following to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction:
a. The original complaint
b. A copy of the Charter LEA Decision
c. A summary of the nature and extent of the investigation conducted by the Charter
LEA (if not covered in the Decision)
d. A report of any action taken to resolve the complaint
e. A copy of the LEA complaint procedures; and
f. Such other relevant information as the Superintendent may require.
Any complainant may appeal a LEA Decision to the State Superintendent by filing a written
appeal within 15 days of receiving the LEA Decision. Extensions for filing appeals may be
granted for good cause.
Direct State Intervention
When the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (Superintendent) receives a complaint
requesting direct State intervention, the Superintendent shall determine whether the
complaint meets one or more of the criterion specified in the California Code of Regulations
(Section 4650), and shall immediately notify the complainant of his or her determination. If
the complaint is not accepted, it will be referred for local investigation.
When direct state intervention is warranted, the following procedures shall be used to
resolve the issues of complaint:
73
1. The Department shall offer to mediate the dispute which may lead to a state
mediation agreement; and
2. The Department shall conduct an on-site investigation if either the Charter LEA or the
complainant waives mediation or mediation fails to resolve the issues.
Mediation shall not exceed thirty days unless the parties agree to an extension.
Mediation Procedures
1. Each party in the dispute shall be notified by the Department and offered the
mediation process as a means of resolving the complaint. Should the parties agree to
mediate, written confirmation shall be sent indicating the time and place of the
mediation conference.
2. Upon acceptance of the Department’s offer to mediate, the allegations to be
addressed shall be sent by certified mail to each party.
3. A trained mediator is appointed.
4. The mediation results are documented in a mediation agreement and signed by the
involved parties.
5. The mediator confirms that the agreement is consistent with all applicable laws and
regulations.
6. A copy of the mediation agreement is sent to each party.
The compliance status of the Charter LEA will revert to noncompliance if they do not perform
the provisions of the mediation agreement within the time specified.
Investigation Procedures
If either party waives mediation, or mediation fails, in part or in whole, those remaining
unresolved issues shall be addressed through the investigation process.
1. At least two weeks prior to the date of an investigation, each party in the dispute
will be notified of the name(s) of the investigator(s) and the investigation dates
2. The investigator will request all documentation regarding the allegations and will
interview the complainant and all involved persons as appropriate to determine the
facts of the case
3. The investigation will be completed within 60 days after receiving a request for
intervention or an appeal, unless the parties agree to extend the timelines.
4. An investigation report shall be mailed to the parties within 60 days from receipt of
the request.
Within 35 days of receipt of the report, either party may request reconsideration by the
Superintendent. The Superintendent may, within 15 days, respond in writing to the parties
either modifying the conclusions or required corrective actions of the Department report, or
74
denying the request. Pending the Superintendent’s reconsideration, the Department’s report
remains in effect and enforceable.
(For specific enforcement provisions see CCR Section 4670.)
75
Appendix to Chapter IV
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
El Dorado County Charter SELPA
Resolution Session Process
Beginning July 1, 2005, Charter LEAs are required by IDEA 2004 to follow a new set of
procedures to provide parents access to due process and the protections of the
procedural safeguards required of federal law.
Complaint Requirements:
Under the reauthorized IDEA there is no right to a due process hearing without a valid
complaint. In order to be considered valid, a complaint must contain (1) the child’s name,
address and school of attendance; (2) a description of the problem with specific related
facts; and (3) a proposed resolution with specific related facts. No longer will a general
assertion of a denial of FAPE be sufficient to initiate a due process hearing.
Motion to Dismiss Complaint: (15 days)
Charter LEAs now have an affirmative duty to file a motion to dismiss those complaints
that do not meet the requirements of the new IDEA. Such motions must be filed within
15 days of receipt of the complaint. If the Charter LEA fails to address the contents of the
complaint, it may be assumed that the Charter LEA accepts the complaints as is and a
charter LEA could be forced to defend an improperly asserted claim at a due process
hearing. Therefore, it is important to evaluate each new complaint as it is received.
Respond to Complaint: (10 days)
Once a valid complaint is received, the Charter LEA must, within 10 calendar days, provide
a written response to the complaint which specifically addresses: (1) why the action
subject to dispute was proposed or rejected; (2) includes a description of the other
options considered and the reason for rejection; (3) the basis of the action; and (4) all
relevant factors related to the decision.
Resolution Session: (15 days)
The Charter LEA is required to schedule a Resolution Session with 15 days of their receipt
of the complaint. This Resolution Session must include the parents, an administrator, and
relevant members of the IEP team. The purpose of this session is to foster early
resolution of special education disputes. Consequently, attorneys are not permitted,
unless the parent brings an attorney. If a parent brings an attorney, that attorney is not
entitled to recover fees for attending the resolution. The Resolution Session is like
mediation, without the assistance of a mediator. Any information discussed at that
meeting is confidential. The outcome of the resolutions session should be a legally
binding settlement agreement.
Once a Charter LEA receives a Due Process Complaint from the Office of Administrative
Hearings they should notify the SELPA office immediately. OAH does not inform the
83
SELPA of filings and it is important to date stamp the date of receipt and fax a copy to the
SELPA. The Charter LEA will respond to the parent’s complaint in writing. The Charter LEA
may also file a letter of insufficiency with OAH. The Charter LEA will offer a Resolution
Session and the parents can choose to accept or waive. When a Charter LEA files for
Mediation or Hearing, a Resolution Session is not required.
Contact the SELPA Director immediately upon receiving a notice of filing from a parent
or from the OAH to obtain sample letters of response and assistance from the SELPA.
The SELPA Director will assist a Charter LEA with their responses to the parent and/or
OAH. If a Resolution Session is required, staff from the El Dorado County SELPA can serve
as the neutral facilitator. The SELPA Director will work with the Charter LEA to locate an
available facilitator.
If agreement is reached at the Resolution Session, OAH must be notified to remove the
matter from hearing. If agreement is not reached, the matter will proceed to mediation
and or hearing.
84
CHAPTER V
SPECIAL EDUCATION
RECORDS
85
Special Education Records
Charter LEAs shall establish, maintain and destroy pupil records according to regulations
adopted by the State Board of Education. The following guidelines apply to confidential
special education records.
1. Access:
Special education records are subject to the same privacy and access right as other
Mandatory Interim pupil records. In addition, parents have the right to examine all
school records of their child that relate to the identification, assessment, and
educational placement of the child. Even though records may be stamped
“confidential” or contain sensitive information, the parent or eligible student has
full rights of access. Parents have the right to receive copies within five business
days of making the request, either orally or in writing. A public educational agency
may charge no more than the actual cost of reproducing the records, but if this
cost prevents the parent from exercising their right to receive the copies, the
copies shall be reproduced at no cost to the parents.
The LEA will not permit access to any child’s records without written parental
permission except as follows:
a. Charter LEA officials and employees who have a legitimate educational interest
including a school system where the child intends to enroll
b. Certain state and federal officials for audit purposes
c. Certain law enforcement agencies for purposes listed in Education Code and
Federal Law
d. A pupil 16 years of age or older, having completed the 10
th
grade who requests
access
The LEA may release information from the student’s records for the following:
a. in cases of emergency when the knowledge of such information is necessary to
protect the health or safety of the child and/or others
b. to determine the child’s eligibility for financial aid
c. to accrediting organizations to the extent necessary to their function
d. in cooperation with organizations conducting studies and research that does
not permit the personal identification of children or their parents by persons
not connected with the research and provided that their personally
identifiable information is destroyed when no longer needed
e. to officials and employees of private schools or school systems in which the
child is enrolled or intends to enroll.
86
Test protocols are considered to be a part of a pupil’s confidential file. Protocols
must be maintained in a pupil’s confidential file and copies provided to the parent
upon request.
(See appendix to this chapter for The Special Education Records Request Process
form.)
2. Confidentiality of Records
All procedural safeguards of the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act shall
be established and maintained. A custodian of records must be appointed by each
LEA to ensure the confidentiality of any personally identifiable student
information. This is usually the case manager, but may be another person who has
been trained in confidentiality procedures.
The custodian of records is responsible for ensuring that files are not easily
accessible to the public. Records of access are maintained for individual files,
which include the name of party, date, and purpose of access.
3. Transfer of Records
When a student moves from one school to another, records should be transferred
in accordance with state and federal law. Unfortunately, federal law requires the
district from which the student moves to notify the parent of the transfer of
records along with the parent’s right to review, challenge and/or receive a copy of
the transferred record. California law specifies that the district which receives the
student shall be responsible for the notification. Procedurally, both requirements
can be met if the district provides an annual notification to the parents of every
student which specifies that records will be transferred and outlines the other
rights cited above. This notice should be provided to all parents each fall and to
the parents of every new student upon enrollment.
CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO OBTAIN PARENT PERMISSION TO
FORWARD RECORDS - IN FACT, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO FORWARD RECORDS TO
ANY CALIFORNIA SCHOOL OF NEW OR INTENDED ENROLLMENT “WITHIN FIVE (5)
DAYS. * Records cannot be withheld for nonpayment of fees or fines. (Education
Code §49068)
Mandatory Permanent Pupil records must be forwarded to all schools. (The
original, or a copy, also must be retained by the sending district.) Mandatory
Interim Pupil records must be forwarded to California public schools and may be
87
forwarded to any other schools. Permitted pupil records may be forwarded at the
discretion of the custodian of the records. Private schools in California are
required to forward Mandatory Permanent Pupil Records.
If an agency or person provides a written report for the school’s information, it
becomes a part of the pupil’s record and, as such, is available to the parent even
though it may be marked “confidential.” (Technically, it becomes a part of the
record only when it is filed or maintained. The custodian of the records should
give serious consideration to the educational value of sensitive information before
routinely including it as a pupil record. As alternatives, the report may be
summarized in a more useful form, it may be returned for revision, or it may be
rejected and destroyed before it becomes a record.)
*Added 6/89
4. Correction or Removal of Information
Parents have the right, on request, to receive a list of the types and locations of
education records collected, maintained and used by the educational agency.
Parents may challenge the content of the student’s record if they believe the
information in education records collected, maintained or used is inaccurate,
misleading, or in violation of the privacy or other rights of the child. This right to
challenge becomes the sole right of the student when the student turns 18 or
attends a post-secondary institution. The request to remove or amend the content
of the student record must be made in writing.
Within 30 days of receiving the request, the superintendent or designee shall meet
with the parent/student and with the employee (if still employed) who recorded
the information in question. The superintendent shall then decide whether to
sustain the allegations and amend the records as requested or deny the
allegations. If the allegations are sustained, the superintendent shall order the
correction or removal and destruction of the information.
When a student grade is involved, the teacher who gave the grade shall be given
an opportunity to state orally, in writing, or both, the reasons why the grade was
given before the grade is changed either by the superintendent or at the decision
of the board. Insofar as practical, the teacher shall be included in all discussions
relating to the changing of the grade.
If the superintendent disagrees with the request to amend the records, the
parent/student may write within 30 days to appeal this decision to the local school
88
board. Within 30 days of receiving the written appeal, the board shall meet in
closed session with the parent and the employee (if still employed) who recorded
the information in question. The governing board shall then decide whether or not
to sustain or deny the allegations. If the governing board sustains any or all of the
allegations, it shall order the superintendent to immediately correct or remove
and destroy the information in question. The decision of the school board is final.
The records of the Governing Board proceedings shall be maintained in a
confidential manner for one year after which they will be destroyed, unless the
parent initiates legal proceedings within the prescribed period relative to the
disputed information.
If the final decision of the governing board is unfavorable to the parent or if the
parent accepts an unfavorable decision by the Charter LEA, the parent shall have
the right to submit a written statement commenting on the record or explaining
any reasons they disagree with the decision of the superintendent or the board.
This explanations shall be included in the records of the child for as long as the
record or contested portion is maintained by local educational agency. If the
records of the child, or contested portion, is given by the agency to any party, the
explanation must also be given to the party.
At the beginning of each school year, parents shall be notified of the availability of
the above procedures for challenging student records.
In order to avoid potential challenges, it is recommended that Charter LEA staff
receive training which alerts them to the requirements of privacy and access laws.
To the degree that a statement describes a student’s behavior, the statement can
withstand challenges. Ambiguous terms should be avoided, and staff members
should restrict their comments to areas of training. In addition, only those
observations which have educational relevancy should be recorded. Statements
describing unrelated family incidents or unsubstantiated claims are inappropriate
for a student’s record.
5. Record Classification and Destruction
Pupil records - in fact, all school public records - are classified as continuing
records until such time as their usefulness ceases. While they are continuing
records, their destruction is governed by a rather complicated set of guidelines.
Certain items are specifically excluded from destruction restrictions. CCR Title 5,
§16020 indicates that copies of originals, pupil passes, tardy slips, admit slips,
notes from home, including verification of illness and individual memorandum
between employees of the Charter LEA are not records and may be destroyed at
any time.
89
Other pupil-related records are defined within the three categories: mandatory
permanent, mandatory interim, and permitted. (See below for a full explanation
of each category.)
Mandatory permanent pupil records become Class I permanent records when
their usefulness ceases, and thus are never destroyed. Caveat: These records or a
copy, are retained for every pupil who was ever enrolled in the Charter LEA. A
copy of the mandatory permanent records is forwarded for students who transfer.
Mandatory interim records can be classified as Class 1 permanent or Class III
disposable when their usefulness ceases. The Charter LEA is responsible for the
classification subject to governing board approval. If mandatory interim records
are classified as disposable, they are to be destroyed in accordance with CCR Title
5, §16029. This requires that they be retained for three years beyond the date of
origination and that the state historian in the Secretary of State’s office be notified
of the pending destruction. If a mandatory interim record in no longer useful but a
decision cannot be made as to whether it should be Class I permanent or Class II
disposable, then it may be classified as Class II optional record and reviewed for
classification a year later.
The third category of pupil records – Permitted - may be destroyed whenever their
usefulness ceases without the waiting period. However, if a student transfers,
graduates or otherwise terminates attendance, such records shall be held six
months and then destroyed.
As Mandatory Permanent pupil records, special education records may be
classified as Class III, disposable, when they are deemed as no longer useful. This
could occur only after transfer or withdrawal from a special education program.
Even after classified as disposable, Mandatory Interim records must be retained
for at least three years beyond the date of the record’s creation.
An important exception applies to those records which were used in assessment
for a special education candidate who does not become a special education
student. In such cases the records are Permitted pupil records and can be
classified as Class III, disposable, and destroyed whenever their usefulness ceases.
90
Appendix to Chapter V
91
Special Education Records Request Process
___ 1. When a parent requests copies of a student’s
special education file, please ask them to put the request
in writing.
___ 2. When received, date stamp the request.
___ 3. Notify your principal, director, program specialist
and/or SELPA director.
___ 4. Provide parents with requested materials within 5
business days. The school may charge parents no more
than the actual costs for making the parent copy. If the
parent cannot afford to pay, they shall not be charged.
___ 5. Courts have ruled that test protocols may be given
to parents. (if requested)
___ 6. Once you have provided copies, document what
you did:
___ a) Enclosed are your requested special education files
provided to you on ______________(date) .
(Have parent(s) sign that they received.)
OR
___ b) Special Education files received on
_____________________________ (date)
by___________________________ (parent name).
AND
___ c) Make a copy of the receipt, keep the original and
provide the parent with the copy.
92
CHAPTER VI
STUDENT DISCIPLINE AND BEHAVIOR
93
Suspension and Expulsion of Special Education Students
Manifestation Determination Guidelines
1. General Definition:
When a Charter LEA proposes to sanction the misconduct of a student with a disability
(IDEA or Section 504 qualified) by expulsion, suspension for an indefinite period, or
suspension for more than ten school days, this constitutes a change of placement for the
student. The Charter LEA then must determine whether the misconduct was directly
caused by the student’s disability and/or whether the IEP was being properly
implemented. This determination is made during a “Manifestation Determination IEP
Meeting”. If it is determined at the meeting that the disability had no direct causal effect
on the misconduct, and the IEP was being properly implemented, then the student may
be disciplined in the same manner as a non-disabled student.
These protections may extend to students “not yet eligible” for special education if it is
shown that the Charter LEA had knowledge that the child had a disability before the
behavioral incident occurred. In such a case, or when a parent requests an evaluation of a
general education child who is suspended or expelled, the evaluation must be expedited.
2. Process:
A Manifestation Determination IEP Meeting must occur no later than 10 school days of
the decision to change the student’s education placement by removing the student from
school for more than 10 days due to a violation of the school’s coded of conduct.
The IEP Team must consider the following factors:
a. The most recent diagnostic evaluations. If the last evaluation is more than 1 year old, a
new evaluation must be completed.
b. Any teacher observations of the student
c. Any discipline incident reports
d. Relevant information supplied by parent
e. The most recent IEP (including Positive Behavior Supports already in place)
f. Any other relevant information in the student’s file, including health records
Using the above information, the IEP Team must determine the answers to two questions:
a. Was the conduct in question caused by the student’s disability or did it have a direct
and substantial relationship to the disability?
b. Was the conduct in question the direct result of the Charter LEA’s failure to implement
the IEP?
94
If the IEP Team determines that answer to both questions above is “no”, the
determination is made that the behavior was not a manifestation of the disability. The
student’s records are then forwarded for further disciplinary action.
If the IEP Team determines that answer to either or both questions above is “yes”, the
determination is made that the behavior was a manifestation of the disability. The
student’s records are forwarded for termination of the disciplinary action; student is
reinstated into his/her school placement that was in effect prior to the removal unless the
school and the parent agree otherwise. A functional behavior assessment/behavior
intervention plan is initiated or reviewed for revision.
a. Exceptions:
Special circumstances necessitate an interim alternative educational setting for
not more than 45 days, because the behavior involved one of the following
special circumstances: drugs, weapons, or infliction of serious bodily injury.
Parent and Charter LEA agree to a change in placement.
3. Manifestation Determination Requirements
Must be made by a group of persons knowledgeable about the student and the meaning
of the evaluation data.
Within 10 days after the date on which the decision to take the action is made.
Must be a reasoned, impartial evaluation of the relatedness of the student’s misconduct
to the disability and the appropriateness of the student’s placement.
If at all possible, the parent should be involved in the determination process, although
they are not “entitled” to participate if they outright refuse to nor display reasonable
willingness to participate. The Charter LEA should make and document reasonable yet
substantial efforts/accommodations to allow for parent participation.
When making a decision regarding appropriateness of placement, by law, an appropriate
placement is one that is “reasonably calculated to confer educational benefit” and is not
the same as “the very best possible placement”. The placement, to be appropriate,
should be one that was based on a careful consideration of academic, emotional and
behavioral needs/concerns and has provided a program and structure, including related
services, that addresses these needs/concerns to a reasonable degree.
This analysis should consider such factors as:
a. Behavior intervention strategies that were or should have been employed.
95
b. The home/Charter LEA communication that has or should have occurred.
c. The general progress that has been made on IEP goals and objectives.
4. Recommended Procedures for a Manifestation Meeting
Parents should be well advised ahead of time regarding the purpose of the meeting and
the procedural safeguards available to them.
All information that comes out of the evaluation process and/or is provided by parent
should be carefully considered by the team. What information/data was considered to
make a determination should be documented.
a. In actuality and by all appearances the process should be an “impartial” one where
decisions are made objectively based on all information available. “Moralizing” or
making value judgments about the way the law “ought to be” or about the student
should not be engaged in during the context of the decision making process.
Members should objectively state their decision and reason for their decision without
trying to emotionally persuade other members or expressing reasons for their
decisions that are beyond the scope of the lawful purpose for/objective of the
meeting.
b. All members should clearly understand the misconduct and all factors related to it that
are necessary to make a decision about manifestation and/or appropriate placement.
c. All members should clearly understand the nature of the student’s disability
thoroughly enough to make decisions regarding manifestation and/or appropriate
placements. This understanding should be based on how the disability would most
likely be manifested by the student as an individual.
d. The parent of a child with a disability who disagrees with any decision regarding the
manifestation determination, or an LEA that believes that maintaining the current
placement of the child is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or others,
may appeal the decision by filing for due process.
e. The decision of the IEP Team shall be forwarded to the Charter LEA’s Board of
Education for appropriate action.
f. It is the recommendation of the El Dorado County Charter SELPA that IEP Teams
utilize the Manifestation Determination Discussion Guide developed by PENT
(Positive Environment Network of Trainers) to guide preparation for the
Manifestation Meeting as well as during the Manifestation Meeting itself. (See
Appendix to this chapter as well as the following website link:
97
Behavioral Interventions for Students with Disabilities
The Hughes Bill (California Education Code Section 56520) and its implementing regulations provide
a framework for developing positive behavior plans and interventions for students with “serious
behavior problems”. In accordance with California Code of Regulations, the El Dorado County
Charter SELPA has developed policies and procedures to govern the systematic use of behavioral
interventions. These policies are in keeping with the SELPA’s philosophy that when a special
education student’s behavior is inappropriate, staff shall use behavioral interventions that are
developmentally appropriate and respect the student’s dignity and privacy.
A functional analysis assessment must be conducted and a positive behavior intervention plan
developed if appropriate, for a student with exceptional needs who is identified as having a serious
behavior problem. A “serious behavior problem” is identified by the regulations as behaviors which
are self injurious, assaultive, or cause serious property damage and other severe behaviors that are
pervasive and maladaptive and for which instructional/behavioral approaches specified in the IEP
are found to be ineffective.
In determining whether a Functional Analysis Assessment and Positive Behavior Intervention plan
are indicated, the IEP Team is advised to consider the following:
Was an emergency intervention used to address the problem behavior?
Have instructional/behavioral approaches specified in the IEP been ineffective?
Does student have an existing behavior plan?
Is the behavior limiting the student’s access to learning, the community or social events?
Functional Analysis Assessment
All assessment, intervention and evaluation activities related to a special education student’s
Behavior Intervention Plan shall be facilitated and supervised by the IEP team. Although in most
cases a functional analysis is initiated by the IEP team, as with any other special education
assessment of a student with an existing IEP, this can be accomplished with or without a formal IEP
provided parent consent is obtained. Before a functional analysis assessment begins, parents shall
be notified and consent obtained.
A functional analysis assessment must be conducted by, or under the supervision of a person who
has documented training in behavior analysis with an emphasis on positive behavioral
interventions. The Behavior Intervention Case Manager (BICM) shall coordinate and assist in
conducting the functional analysis assessment.
Once it is determined that a student with a disability requires a functional analysis assessment, the
regulations require that the following elements be included:
An accurate definition and description of the frequency, duration and intensity of the
problem behavior including baseline data
98
A history of the problem behavior, including the effectiveness of previously used
interventions
A summary of all relevant educational records
Health and medical factors which may influence behavior
a.) Medication
b.) Sleep cycles
c.) Health
d.) Diet
An ecological analysis of the settings in which the behavior occurs including, but not limited
to:
a.) Physical setting
b.) Social setting
c.) Nature of instruction/ degree of participation
d.) Scheduling
e.) Degree of independence/choice
f.) Quality of the communication between the individual and staff and other students
g.) Amount of social interaction
Reinforcers must be identified that are specific to the student.
An analysis of the antecedents and consequences of the behavior based on data collected
across all appropriate settings.
A description of the rate of alternative behaviors, including their antecedents and
consequences
Information to complete the functional analysis assessment must be obtained from all of the
following:
A review of all available data including individual records and assessment reports
Direct and systematic observation
Interviews with significant others
Based on the information gathered from the functional analysis assessment, a hypothesis is
generated regarding the function of the behavior.
Behavior Intervention Plan
The behavior intervention plan is a written document that is developed by the IEP team, including
the BICM. Behavior interventions are designed to provide the student with greater access to a
variety of community settings, social contacts and education programs.
The behavior intervention plan must include the following information:
A summary of information gathered from the functional analysis assessment (report);
An objective and measurable description of the targeted “maladaptive” behavior(s) and
functionally equivalent replacement positive behavior(s) (FERB);
Individual goals and objectives specific to the behavioral intervention plan;
99
A detailed description of the behavioral interventions to be used and the circumstances for
their use;
Specific schedules for recording the frequency of the use of interventions and the frequency
for the targeted replacement behaviors; including specific criteria for discontinuing the use
of the interventions for lack of effectiveness or replacing it with an identified and specific
alternative;
Criteria by which the procedure will be faded or phased out or less intense/frequent
restrictive behavioral intervention schedules or techniques will be used;
Those behavioral interventions which will be used in non-educational settings;*
Specific dates for periodic review by the IEP team of the program’s effectiveness;
The frequency of consultation to be provided by the behavior intervention case manager to
the staff and parents who are responsible for implementing the plan.
*A copy of the plan shall be provided to the person or agency responsible for implementation in
non-educational settings.
Behavior intervention plans must also include the following elements:
Environmental changes needed prior to or during plan implementation;
Direct treatment strategies for positive replacement behaviors including reinforcement
systems;
Positive programming/teaching techniques and strategies;
Reactive strategies for problem behaviors.
The Behavior Intervention Plan shall become a part of the student’s IEP and shall be sufficiently
detailed so as to direct the plan’s implementation.
Evaluation
As specified in the Behavior Intervention Plan, a schedule for reviewing the effectiveness of the
plan is part of the original document. The frequency of the periodic review is determined by the
type of plan and the support needed by on-site staff. The periodic review will make use of ongoing
measurement data in determining the appropriateness of the intervention. The following elements
should be included when the IEP team evaluates the effectiveness of the plan:
Document that program implementation occurred;
Obtain data on the frequency, duration and intensity of the behavior at intervals
determined by the IEP team;
Evaluate plan effectiveness (compare baseline data with current data).
The method of contact and schedule for reviewing the plan must be agreed upon by the IEP team,
including the parent. The review process may occur by any of the following means:
100
Telephone contact and/or email;
Notes/report to parents;
Meetings.
Making Changes to the Behavior Intervention Plan
If the IEP team determines that changes to the plan are necessary to increase program
effectiveness, additional assessments shall be conducted, and changes to the behavior intervention
plan shall be proposed based on the outcomes. The BICM (or designee) and the parent may make
minor modifications to the plan, as long as the parent can review any data that changes are based
on and the parent is informed of their right to question modifications through the IEP process.
The recommended forms/procedures for developing a Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for
Severe Behavior (Self-Injurious, Assaultive, Serious property Damage and Other Pervasive,
Maladaptive Behavior) are located on the PENT (Positive Environment Network of Trainers)
website at: http://www.pent.ca.gov/forms.htm , (1 - Coversheet | 2 - FAA Data Collection | 3 -
Core Plan | 4 - PBIP Data Collection) or in the appendix to this chapter (pages 109-118).
Behavior Intervention Case Manager (BICM)
Qualifications and Training
The BICM is a designated certificated Charter LEA staff member or other qualified
personnel contracted by the Charter LEA, with training in behavior analysis with emphasis
on positive behavioral interventions. The duties may be performed by any existing staff
member who is appropriately trained in positive behavior analysis, including, but not
limited to, a teacher, resource specialist, Charter LEA psychologist or program specialist.
The BICM must meet the following criteria:
a.) He or she is a qualified Charter LEA staff member and meets federal and state
certification, licensing, registration or other comparable requirements which apply to
the area in which he/she is providing special education or related services.
b.) He or she has had training in the following areas:
Context of the Hughes Bill and implementing regulations
Requirements of the legislation
Definition of key terms
Knowledge of what constitutes a legally acceptable functional
analysis and behavior intervention plan
Role of the BICM in educational settings
Conducting an Ecological Analysis
a.) Environmental variables that may influence behavior
b.) Knowledge of how consequences and antecedents effect behavior
101
c.) Knowledge of curriculum (including functional and critical skills) and developmentally
appropriate practices
d.) Knowledge of teaching strategies
Assessing Behavior
a.) Analysis of antecedents and consequences
b.) Data collection techniques
c.) Data analysis
d.) Determining the communicative function of the behavior (developing hypothesis)
e.) Knowledge of multiple factors affecting behavior and behavior change
Developing a Behavior Intervention Plan
a.) Essential components of BIP including
Designing environmental interventions to support behavior change
Direct treatment strategies
Positive programming
Reactive strategies
b.) Selecting replacement behaviors
c.) Principles of reinforcement
d.) Strategies for ongoing data collection
Emergency Interventions
a.) Definition of behavioral emergencies
b.) Guidelines for responding to behavioral emergencies including restrictions on use of
aversive techniques
c.) SELPA policies governing the use of emergency interventions
d.) Timelines and legal requirements of emergency interventions
Responsibilities of the Behavior Intervention Case Manager (BICM)
Consulting with staff on possible referrals.
Training or assisting in the training of staff in data collection procedures, functional analysis
and behavior intervention strategies.
Delegating and overseeing data collection, functional analysis, and intervention.
Monitoring timelines for the IEP at which the functional analysis assessment is presented.
Monitoring the implementation of the intervention strategies and the follow up meetings of
the team.
Meeting with other case managers on a regularly scheduled basis.
Developing or assisting in the documentation of the intervention process.
Behavior Intervention Planning Team
The Charter SELPA recognizes that the IEP/Behavioral Intervention Planning Team may need to
involve when appropriate, classroom aides, general education teachers, Charter LEA psychologists,
lunchroom or playground supervisors, or other interested credentialed staff, in addition to the
102
classroom teacher, the child’s parents and the BICM. Active involvement of the site administrator
may also be a critical factor in the program’s success. A successful IEP team capitalizes on the
experience and expertise of all its members.
Qualifications and Training
a.) Behavior Aides (under the direct supervision of professional staff)
knowledge of introductory child development
training in positive behavioral interventions
understanding of individual differences and environmental effects on behavior
knowledge of and ability to apply acceptable emergency procedures according to
direction, law, and SELPA policy and positive behavioral interventions
ability to relate positively to children
b.) Credentialed staff who could potentially be involved in supporting a student with a
behavior plan (e.g., general education teachers or other credentialed staff)
knowledge of child development
knowledge of individual differences, impact of medical, emotional and
psychosocial factors on behavior and various teaching techniques to meet these
differences
understanding of which emergency procedures are allowed by law
all of the above mentioned skills
c.) Credentialed staff that is supporting a student with a behavior plan (e.g., special
education teachers, Charter LEA psychologists, program specialists or other interested
credentialed staff):
ability to define key concepts and components of behavioral intervention
regulations
ability to give examples of good practice to each step in developing and
implementing a behavioral intervention plan
ability to use key concepts to discuss student behavior
ability to demonstrate mastery of SELPA-approved emergency behavioral
interventions
all of the above mentioned skills
d.) Credentialed staff directly responsible for implementing a behavior plan (e.g., special
educators or other interested credentialed staff):
completion of supervised experience in positive behavioral interventions with
students with disabilities who exhibit maladaptive behaviors
ability to collaborate with all IEP team members in positive behavioral plan
development and implementation
all of the above mentioned skills
103
Definition of a Behavioral Emergency:
A behavioral emergency is the demonstration of a serious behavior problem:
1) which has not previously been observed and for which an intervention plan has not
been developed; or
2) for which a previously designed behavioral intervention is not effective.
Emergency Behavioral Interventions
Behavioral emergency interventions shall not be used as a substitute for behavioral
intervention plans. (Title 5, Section 3052)
Emergency interventions may only be used to control unpredictable, spontaneous
behavior which poses clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the individual
or others or serious property damage and which cannot be immediately prevented by a
less restrictive response (Title 5, Section 3052).
The following emergency interventions, included in “management of assaultive behavior”
training, are approved by the SELPA for use by CPI (Crisis Prevention Institute) trained
staff only and may only be used as a last resort when a person is a danger to self or
others:
a.) Use of CPI’s Personal Safety Techniques
b.) Nonviolent Physical Crisis Intervention and Team Intervention:
“children’s control position” for students who are considerably
smaller than the staff person
“team control position” utilizing at least two team members
“transport position” utilizing at least two team members
“interim control position”
c.) Prone restraints of any type are not approved by SELPA, and are not a part of CPI
training. Force shall never exceed what is reasonable and necessary under the
circumstances, and the duration of the intervention shall not be longer than is
necessary to contain the dangerous behavior.
Emergency interventions may not include:
a.) Any intervention that is likely to cause physical pain.
b.) Releasing noxious, toxic or otherwise unpleasant sprays, mists or substances near a
student’s face.
c.) Any intervention that is used to subject, or likely to subject, the individual to verbal
abuse, ridicule or humiliation, or which can be expected to cause emotional trauma.
d.) Physical intimidation or threats given verbally, physically, or through body language.
104
e.) Using any material or objects which simultaneously immobilize all hands and feet,
except that techniques such as prone containment may be used as an emergency
intervention by trained staff.
f.) Locked seclusion, or the isolation of an individual in a locked room as an emergency
procedure.
g.) Locked time out.
h.) Face in lap, or similar positions.
i.) Any intervention that precludes adequate supervision of the individual.
j.) Any intervention which deprives the individual of one or more of his senses (facial
screening, blindfolds, helmet, talk back, etc.)
Behavior Emergency Report
Parents/guardians shall be notified within one school day whenever an emergency
intervention is used that is defined above under approved emergency procedures. A
Behavioral Emergency Report shall immediately be completed and maintained in the
student’s file. The report shall include all of the following:
a.) The name and age of the student.
b.) The setting and location of the incident.
c.) The name of the staff or other persons involved.
d.) A description of the incident and the emergency intervention.
e.) A statement of whether the student is currently engaged in a systematic Behavior
Intervention Plan.
f.) Details of any injuries sustained by the student or others, including staff, as a result of
the incident.
All Behavioral Emergency Reports shall immediately be forwarded to, and reviewed by, a
designated responsible administrator.
Anytime a Behavioral Emergency Report is written regarding a student who does not have a
behavior intervention plan, the designated responsible administrator shall, within two days,
schedule an IEP team meeting to review the emergency report and decide if a functional
analysis assessment and/or interim behavior intervention plan is needed. The IEP must
document its reasons if it decides not to perform the functional analysis assessment or
develop an interim plan.
Anytime a Behavioral Emergency Report is written regarding a student who has a
behavioral intervention plan, any incident involving a previously unseen, serious behavior
problem or where a previously designed intervention is not effective, should be referred to
the IEP team to review and determine if the incident constitutes a need to modify the plan.
Behavioral Emergency Report data shall be collected annually by the SELPA, and submitted
to the California Department of Education and the Advisory Commission on Special
Education.
105
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDRESSING BEHAVIOR
IN STUDENTS WITH EXCEPTIONAL NEEDS
In addition to the State requirements for addressing severe behaviors, Federal law requires that
Behavior Plans (Behavior Support Plans) be developed for students who evidence behaviors which
“impede learning” and that a Functional Behavioral Assessment be conducted in response to
certain disciplinary actions. Specifically, a Functional Behavioral Assessment is required any time
suspensions are over 10 cumulative days or there is an involuntary change in placement.
Federal requirements are general: to conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment and develop a
Behavior Plan. This appropriately allows teams to develop assessment plans individualized to the
student’s needs and functioning level and to conduct individualized assessment. Extensive
materials are available on conducting “functional” behavioral assessment, but the basic assumption
is that all behaviors occur within a particular context and serve a specific purpose. The only specific
provided for in federal law is the definition of behavioral assessment as being “functional”. This
means that IEP teams are charged with determining the purpose of the behavior.
Functional behavior assessment is considered to be a problem solving process. A variety of
techniques and strategies are available to identify the purpose of the behavior, but unlike the
California State Title V requirements that specify all the elements that must be present in a
Functional Analysis Assessment, professionals make this determination based on individual student
needs. Variables that will affect the choice of methods and sources used may include the
functioning level of the student, including the student’s ability to self report and degree of self
awareness, the frequency and severity of the behavior, the history of the behavior and the
circumstances under which the behavior is observed.
Educators are required to address behaviors that interfere with the student’s learning or the
learning of others, to identify these problems early and to intervene appropriately. In most
instances, there is in fact a pattern of behavior that lends itself to functional assessment. However,
functional assessment is more problematic when an isolated behavior results in a disciplinary
action, thereby triggering the requirement for Functional Behavioral Assessment. In these
instances, where additional behaviors have not been observed that interfere with learning, the
resulting Behavior Plans may identify supports and services that target the skill deficits or address
larger social deficits. Replacement behaviors are considered only in the abstract, and may be
addressed in the context of skill building or self-management training (anger management training,
substance abuse programs, etc).
Functional Behavioral Assessments and Behavior Plans may vary significantly in style and content.
The following are critical elements that should be addressed when conducting a Behavioral
Assessment and developing a Behavior Plan:
a)Was the assessment individualized based on student need?
b)Were multiple sources and methods used to gather information?
c)Was the information analyzed to determine if patterns of behavior are present?
d)Was an attempt made to identify the function of the behavior?
e)Was a replacement behavior identified, if appropriate?
106
f)Does the proposed BP address both the source of the problem and the problem itself?
g)Does the BP identify a variety of strategies and supports?
h)Does the BP emphasize the development of positive behaviors?
i) Are the interventions appropriate to the developmental levels of the student? (including
cognitive development, communication ability and emotional functioning).
OVERVIEW OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FAA and FBA
(The Differences between State and Federal Requirements
for Behavior Assessment and Planning)
At the present time, there appears to be some confusion regarding the use of the terms Functional
Analysis Assessment (FAA) and Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA). Both types of assessments
are based on determining the function of a behavior with the goal of using this information to
develop appropriate behavior plans. However, they are very different types of assessments, with
one (FAA) being highly prescribed and regulated primarily for use with severely disabled students
(California Hughes Bill) and the other (FBA) being a requirement for addressing behaviors in a
disciplinary context.
The specific requirements for conducting Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA) were developed
and signed into law in California in 1990 in the context of addressing the appropriate treatment of
students with severe disabilities in educational settings. An FAA is appropriate for students with
severe disabilities who evidence serious behavior problems and students who exhibit a pattern of
maladaptive behavior that has been resistant to other behavioral interventions.
Federal law does not specify any requirements for conducting Functional Behavioral Assessments
(FBA). Under Federal law, behavioral assessment could appropriately consist of a record review,
interview or direct observation. When behavioral assessment is being conducted in a disciplinary
context, the specific behavior may have occurred only once. The function of the behavior is likely to
be established as part of a retrospective analysis. In most cases it is not possible to satisfy the
requirements for conducting a Functional Analysis Assessment with behaviors that occur
infrequently, such as bringing drugs or weapons to Charter LEA/school.
107
Positive Behavior Support Plans
Current Federal and State Law require LEAs to develop Positive Behavior Support Plans (PBSP) as
a preventative intervention for students who begin to evidence behavior that is impeding the
learning of self or others. These PBSPs can and should be developed as part of General Education
interventions before a student is referred for special education. If an IEP is developed for a
student, the need for possible Positive Behavioral Interventions must be addressed in the IEP.
(CFR §300.324)
***It is the recommendation of the El Dorado County Charter SELPA that IEP Teams utilize the
Positive Behavior Support Planning materials developed by PENT (Positive Environment Network
of Trainers) to guide development of an effective positive behavior support plan. (See Appendix
to this chapter (pages 119-123) as well as the following website links:
http://www.pent.ca.gov/behBbsps.htm
http://www.pent.ca.gov/forms.htm ) (Fillable template format)
108
Appendix to Chapter VI
109
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
110
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious, Assaultive,
Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
111
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
112
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious, Assaultive,
Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
113
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
114
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious, Assaultive,
Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
115
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious, Assaultive,
Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
116
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
117
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
118
Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan for Severe Behavior: Self-Injurious,
Assaultive, Serious Property Damage, and other Pervasive, Maladaptive Behavior
119
BSP
120
BSP
121
BSP
122
BSP
123
BSP
124
CHAPTER VII
MISCELLANEOUS
125
Special Education Transportation
The IEP team for any special education student must clearly specify how the child’s transportation needs
will be met. Transportation may be a required service if it is needed in order for the child to receive a
free and appropriate public education. Therefore, IEP teams should consider the disability of each
individual student, the need for a student to participate with non-disabled peers to the extent possible,
and the student’s safety when recommending one of several different transportation options.
1. The student, though enrolled in a Special Education program, is attending his/her
neighborhood school. The IEP team determines that no special transportation is required.
This student would be treated as a regular student for transportation purposes and would
either walk or take district bus transportation to their school. Regular bus transportation
would include walking to and waiting at a designated bus stop.
IEP documentation: The notes of the IEP should reflect discussion regarding
transportation needs and the finding that specialized transportation is not required.
2. If specialized transportation is required in order for the student to receive an appropriate
education, the following options should be discussed by the IEP team:
a. The disability of the student does not significantly interfere with locomotion or
judgment. The IEP team determines that the student could safely walk to the end
of a driveway or to some other designated and approved bus stop to wait for
transportation.
b. The disability of the student is such that door to door transportation is required in
order for the student to receive an appropriate education.
IEP documentation: The IEP team shall document that transportation will be required.
Notes of the meeting should reflect discussion.
126
Taken from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/trnsprtgdlns.asp Last modified: Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Special Education Transportation Guidelines
Guidelines for use by Individualized Education Program (IEP) Teams when determining required transportation services.
California Education Code (EC) citations, including Code content, and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) citations have been
updated to reflect changes since October 18, 1993. Changes made in October 2002, are noted by italics.
Preface
EC Section 41851.2 (Assembly Bill 876 [Canella], Chapter 283, Statutes of 1991), required the State Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SSPI) to develop special education transportation guidelines for use by individualized education program (IEP)
teams that clarify when special education services are required.
The State Board of Education, Advisory Commission on Special Education, Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA)
Administrators, Special Education Administrators of County Offices (SEACO), Protection & Advocacy, Inc., Team of Advocates
for Special Kids (TASK), school districts, County Offices of Education (COE), transportation offices, California Department of
Education staff and other interested parties provided valuable contributions to the development of the 1993 Guidelines For Use
By Individualized Education Program (IEP) Teams When Determining Required Transportation Services.
The guidelines should be utilized to plan and implement transportation services to pupils that require this service to benefit from
special education instruction and/or related services.
Introduction
EC Section 56040 states: "Every individual with exceptional needs, who is eligible to receive educational instruction, related
services, or both under this part [ Part 30 ] shall receive such educational instruction, services, or both, at no cost to his or her
parents or, as appropriate, to him or her." Special education transportation is defined in federal regulation (34 CFR. Section
300.24 ) as a related service. Transportation is required to be provided if it is necessary for the student to benefit from special
education instruction. In addition, as required for any special education program, the service must be provided to meet the
criteria for a free, appropriate public education.
EC Section 41851.2 (Assembly Bill 876 (Canella), Chapter 283, Statutes of 1991), required that the SSPI develop special
education transportation guidelines for use by IEP teams that clarify "when special education services, as defined by Education
Code Section 41850, are required." EC 41850(d) defines "special education transportation" as:
"The transportation of severely disabled special day class pupils, and orthopedically impaired pupils who require a vehicle with a
wheelchair lift, who received transportation in the prior fiscal year, as specified in their individualized education program.
"A vehicle that was used to transport special education pupils."
EC 41850(b) (5) defines "home-to-school transportation services" for pupils with exceptional needs as:
"The transportation of individuals with exceptional needs as specified in their individualized education programs, who do not
receive special education transportation as defined in subdivision (d)"
Examples that IEP teams may consider under EC 41850(b) include pupils with severe disabilities who are not placed in special
day classes or otherwise enrolled in programs serving pupils with profound disabilities, pupils with orthopedic disabilities who do
not use wheelchairs or require lifts, students beginning special education who did not receive transportation under an IEP in the
127
prior fiscal year, pupils with other health impairments, learning disabilities or other cognitive disabilities, or pupils who live beyond
reasonable distance to their school and would not, without transportation, have access to appropriate special education
instruction and related services at no cost.
Considerations for Use by Local Education Agencies, Special Education Local Plan Areas, County Offices Of Education
and/or Transportation Cooperatives
It is recommended that these issues and concepts be taken under consideration by all LEAs, SELPAs, COEs and/or
transportation cooperatives that provide any special education transportation in preparation for organizing a transportation
system and providing services that will allow for students' placement in the least restrictive environment while also allowing for
the most cost-effective special education transportation system.
Transportation Policies
Each LEA providing special education is required to adopt policies for the programs and services it operates, consistent with
agreements with other districts or county offices and/or agreements stated as part of the local plan for special education (EC
56195.8 ). These policies describe how special education transportation is coordinated with regular home-to-school
transportation and set forth criteria for meeting the transportation needs of pupils receiving special education (EC 56195.8(b)(5)).
It is recommended these policies focus upon pupil needs as the primary consideration for determining transportation services
and that these policies also address the needs of pupils who may be eligible for transportation services as required by the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504.
Delivery of Services
Districts/SELPAs/COEs responsible for implementation of IEPs should be knowledgeable of transportation policies and/or
procedures that address the responsibilities of the IEP team in regard to transportation and the delivery of services to eligible
students in their least restrictive environment.
This includes consideration of services that are provided in the setting appropriate to the needs of the student at the pupil's
neighborhood school, or within the district or SELPA; regional and/or magnet programs and services may also be appropriate to
the needs of the pupil. Consideration should be taken regarding the effect that the location of a placement will have on the
length of time that a student has to or from school each day. Placements should not be made solely on a "space available"
basis. If a student is receiving services outside of his/her residence area, the placement should be reviewed at least annually in
order to determine if a placement closer to the student's residence would be appropriate.
Location of Programs, Placement of Pupils
The efficiency of a transportation system for special education is partially dependent on the location of the program sites and the
placements of students. A demographic and geographic review that analyzes the present locations of programs, program
needs, and population served should take place. Program service regions with clearly defined service areas can then be
established, using residence areas of the neighborhood schools. While this also involves the issue of available facilities, a
mission statement and policies developed by the agency may promote the comprehensive commitment to all pupils and the
acceptance of pupils with exceptional needs in a broad variety of settings.
Additional Policy Considerations
Other subjects that need policy and procedure directives may include control of pupil medicine transported between home and
school on a vehicle; student suspension; physical intervention and management; authority to use special harnesses, vest, and
belts; early closing of school due to inclement weather or other emergencies; authority to operate special equipment; when no
adult is home to receive pupils; when and how to involve community emergency medical and/or law enforcement personnel; use
of mobility aides; control and management of confidential information; use of bus aides; and other.
Coordination of Calendars and Schedules
Coordination of student attendance calendars at all school sites that provide special education services is necessary to fully
utilize transportation services and to minimize the number of required days of transportation service.
128
In unified districts, multi-track districts, multi-district SELPAs, COEs and/or in transportation cooperatives, standardization of
calendars should include the coordination of starting and ending dates of school years, bell schedules (starting and ending
times), vacation/intersession breaks, staff development days (School Improvement Program, School Based Coordinated
Program, other), minimum day schedules, etc. This coordination should be done so that all significant transportation
implications are addresses and transportation resources are effectively utilized.
Length of School Day, Related Services, Extracurricular Events
It should be noted that the use of alternative starting times for all special education students at a site can lead to program
compliance concerns. Pupils receiving special education and related services must be provided with an educational program in
accordance with their IEP for at least the same length of time as the regular school day for their chronological peer group, unless
otherwise stated in a student's IEP. In addition, there may be occasions where the needs of the pupil require receiving therapy
or some other related service that cannot be provided during the "established" school day. If provisions for "early" or "late"
transportation are made for pupils within the general education program due to extra curricular events, provisions for equal
opportunity to these events for pupils with exceptional needs who require special transportation must also be made.
Use of Policy and Resource Information
An overview of all available transportation resources should be provided to all administrators, IEP team leaders/case managers
or chairpersons and other IEP team members who are authorized to recommend the type of special education service and the
location where the service will be provided.
Guidelines For Use By The Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team
Local Education Agency Rules and Policies
All pupils, including those receiving specialized instruction and services, are subject to the rules and policies governing regular
transportation offerings within the local education agency, unless the specific needs of the eligible pupil or the location of the
special education program/service dictate that special education transportation is required.
Primary Consideration: Pupil Needs
The specific needs of the pupil must be the primary consideration when an IEP team is determining any transportation needs.
These may include, but are not limited to:
1. Medical diagnosis and health needs consideration of whether long bus rides could affect a certain pupil's health
(duration, temperature control, need for services, health emergencies); general ability and/or strength to
ambulate/wheel; approximate distance from school or the distance needed to walk or wheel oneself to the school;
consideration of pupil needs in inclement or very hot weather, other.
2. Physical accessibility of curbs, sidewalks, streets, and public transportation systems.
3. Pupil capacity consideration of a pupil's capacity to arrive at school on time, to avoid getting lost, to avoid dangerous
traffic situations, and to avoid other potentially dangerous or exploitative situations on the way to and from school.
4. Behavioral Intervention Plans (Title 5, CCR 3001 (f)) specified by the pupil's IEP and consideration of how to implement
such plans while a pupil is being transported.
5. Other transportation needs mid-day or other transportation needs as required on a pupil's IEP (for example,
occupational or physical therapy or mental health services at another site, community based classes, etc.) must also be
taken into consideration when the IEP team discusses a pupil's placement and transportation needs.
Transportation Staff and IEP Team Meetings
Effective practice requires that procedures are developed for communication with transportation personnel and that
transportation staff are present at IEP team meetings when the pupil needs the use of adaptive or assistive equipment, when
school bus equipment is required to be modified, when the pupil exhibits severe behavioral difficulties and a behavior
intervention plan is to be implemented, when the pupil is medically fragile and requires special assistance, and/or when the pupil
has other unique needs.
129
Transportation Options
Considering the identified needs of the pupil, transportation options may include, but not be limited to: walking, riding the regular
school bus, utilizing available public transportation (any out-of-pocket costs to the pupil or parents are reimbursed by the local
education agency), riding a special bus from a pick up point, and portal-to-portal special education transportation via a school
bus, taxi, reimbursed parent's driving with a parent's voluntary participation, or other mode as determined by the IEP team.
When developing specific IEP goals and objectives related to the pupil's use of public transportation, the IEP team may wish to
consider a blend of transportation services as the pupil's needs evolve. Specialized transportation as a related service must be
written on the pupil's IEP with specificity and should be approved by the transportation administrator. It is recommended that
services be described in sufficient enough detail to inform the parties of how, when and from where to where transportation will
be provided and, where arrangements for the reimbursement of parents are required, the amount and frequency of
reimbursement.
Suspension from the School Bus
Occasionally pupils receiving special education services are suspended from bus transportation (EC 48900-48900. 7, Grounds
for Suspension). The suspension of a pupil receiving special education services from California transportation can constitute a
significant change of placement if the district: 1) has been transporting the student; 2) suspends the student from transportation
as a disciplinary measure; and 3) does not provide another mode of transportation (Office of Civil Rights, Letter of Finding
Complaint No. 04-89-1236, December 8, 1989).
A significant change in placement requires a meeting of the IEP team to review the pupil's IEP. During the period of any
exclusion from bus transportation, pupils must be provided with an alternative form of transportation at no cost to the pupil or
parent in order to be assured of having access to the required special education instruction and services (EC 48915.5).
EC 48915.5(j) reads: "If an individual with exceptional needs is excluded from schoolbus transportation, the pupil is entitled to
be provided with an alternative form of transportation at no cost to the pupil or parent." (Effective through 12/31/2002.)
EC 48915.5(c) reads: "If an individual with exceptional needs is excluded from school bus transportation, the pupil is entitled to
be provided with an alternative form of transportation at no cost to the pupil or parent or guardian provided that transportation is
specified in the pupil's individualized education program." (AB 1859, Chapter 492, Statutes of 2002. Effective 01/01/2003.)
Summary
The LEA providing special education is required to adopt policies for the programs and services it operates, consistent with
agreements with other districts or county offices stated as part of the local plan for special education. These policies describe
how special education transportation is coordinated with regular home-to-school transportation and set forth criteria that are
consistent with these Guidelines for meeting the transportation needs of pupils receiving special education.
These policies and an overview of all available transportation resources should be provided to all administrators, IEP team
leaders/case managers/chairpersons and other IEP team members who are authorized to recommend the type of special
education service and the location where the service will be provided.
The specific needs of the pupil must be the primary consideration when an IEP team is determining transportation services. It is
often beneficial to have transportation staff present at IEP team meetings. The combination of planning and providing
information to IEP teams maximizes appropriate placements and efficient cost-effective transportation systems.
Notice
The guidance in the Special Education Transportation Guidelines is not binding on local education agencies (LEAs) or
other entities. Except for the statutes, regulations, and court decisions that are referenced herein, the Guidelines are
exemplary and compliance is not mandatory. [Education Code Section 33308.5]
Please direct questions to the Special Education Division's Focused Monitoring and Technical Assistance Consultant assigned to your
county
