RESOURCES

21.1 ACRONYMS 21.2 ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY CHECKIST 21.3 CAHSEE EXEMPTION

21.4 GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY 21.5 GRADES, REPORT CARDS AND TRANSCRIPTS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 21.6 GUIDELINES FOR TRANSITION FROM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 21.7 McKINNEY-VENTO HOMELESS ACT 21.8 POTENTIAL DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS OF PARAEDUCATOR SUPPORT 21.9 PROMOTION AND RETENTION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES 21.10 RESOLUTION SESSIONS 21.11 SECTION 504 15.12.1 Section 504 Guidance 15.12.2 Section 504 Process Flowchart 15.12.3 IDEA and Section 504: A Comparison 15.12.4 Section 504/ADA Student Eligibility Form 15.12.5 Recommendations for Section 504/ADA Plans 15.12.6 Sample Section 504 Plan 15.12.7 A Sampling of Concerns 15.12.8 504/ADA Procedural Safeguards Notice 21.13 DETERMINING SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY USING RESPONSE TO

INSTRUCTION AND INTERVENTION (RtI2)

1

21.14 SPECIAL EDUCATION TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES, CDE

GUIDELINES

21.15 STATE COMPLAINT PROCEDURES OVERVIEW 21.16 STATE TESTING AND REPORTING (STAR)

15.18.1 MATRICES OF TEST VARIATIONS, ACCOMMODATIONS, AND MODIFICATIONS 15.18.2 CMA PARTICIPATION CRITERIA AND DEFINITION OF TERMS 15.18.3 CAPA PARTICIPATION CRITERIA ELIGIBILITY FORM 15.18.4 CALIFORNIA ALTERNATE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT PARTICIPATION CRITERIA 15.18.5 DESIRED RESULTS DEVELOPMENTAL PROFILE (DRDP)

21.18 TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES FOR STUDENTS UNDER AB 490 AND

MCKINNEY VENTO 21.19 TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT GUIDELINES FOR OUT –OF-COUNTY RESIDENTIAL NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS 21.20 WEBSITES

2

ACRONYMS AAC Augmentative Alternative Communication ABA Applied Behavioral Analysis ACSA Association of California School Administrators ACSE Advisory Commission on Special Education ADA American with Disabilities Act ADA Average Daily Attendance ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution AIR American Institutes for Research ALJ Administrative Law Judge APE Adapted Physical Education API Academic Performance Index ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act AT Assistive Technology AU Administrative Unit AYP Adequate Yearly Progress BCBA Board Certified Behavioral Analyst BD Behavior Disorder BHRS Behavioral Health and Recovery Services BICM Behavior Intervention Case Manager BIP Behavior Intervention Plan CAFSE Coalition for Adequate Funding for Special Education CAC Community Advisory Committee CAHSEE California High School Exit Exam CALPADS California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System CalSTAT California Services for Technical Assistance and Training CALTIDES California Longitudinal Teacher Information Data Education System CAPA California Alternate Performance Based Assessment CASEMIS California Special Education Management Information System CBI Community Based Instruction CCF Community Care Facility CCR California Code of Regulations CCS California Children Services CDE California Department of Education CEIS Coordinated Early Intervening Services CELDT California English Language Development Test CMA California Modified Assessment CMH County Mental Health COE County Office of Education COLA Cost of Living Adjustment COTA Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant CSS Communication Severity Scales DDS Department of Developmental Services

3

DHS Department of Health Services DIBELS Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy DIS Designated Instructional Service DMH Department of Mental Health DOF Department of Finance DOL District of Location DOR District of Residence DRDP Desired Results Developmental Profile DTT Discrete Trial Training EC Education Code ECE Early Childhood Education ED Emotional Disturbance EL English Learner ELA English/Language Arts ESEA Elementary and Secondary Education Act ESY Extended School Year FAA Functional Analysis Assessment FAPE Free and Appropriate Public Education FBA Functional Behavioral Assessment FERPA Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act FFA Foster Family Agency FFH Family Foster Home FIEP Facilitated Individualized Education Program FMTA Focused Monitoring and Technical Assistance FTE Full time equivalent GGRC Golden Gate Regional Center HIPAA Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act HOH Hearing of Hearing HOUSSE High, Objective, Uniform State Standards of Evaluation HQ Highly Qualified IA Instructional Assistant ID Intellectual Disability IDEA Individualized with Disabilities Education Act IDEIA Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act IDELR Individuals with Disabilities Education Law Report IDT Inter-district Transfer IHE Institute of Higher Education ISA Individual Service Agreement (for NPS/NPA) IAES Interim Alternative Educational Setting ICF Intermediate Care Facility IEE Independent Educational Evaluation IEP Individualized Educational Program IPP Individual Program Plan ISP Individual Services Plan

4

IFSP Individual Family Service Plan ITP Individual Transition Plan IWEN Individual with Exceptional Needs JPA Joint Powers Agreement LAO Legislative Analyst’s Office LCI Licensed Children’s’ Institution LEA Local Educational Agency LI Low Incidence LRE Least Restrictive Environment MOE Maintenance of Effort MTU Medical Therapy Unit MOU Memorandum of Understanding NASDSE National Association of State Directors of Special Education NOI Notice of Insufficiency NPS/NPA Non-Public Schools/Non-Public Agencies NSS Necessary Small SELPAs OAH Office of Administrative Hearings OCR Office of Civil Rights OHI Other Health Impairment OI Orthopedic Impairment O&M Orientation and Mobility OOHC Out of Home Care OSEP Office of Special Education Programs OSERS Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services OT /PT Occupational and Physical Therapy PDD Pervasive Developmental Disorder PECS Picture Exchange Communication System PENT Positive Environment, Network of Trainers PERS Public Employee Retirement System PHP Parents Helping Parents PI Program Improvement PLAAFP Present Levels of Academic Achievement Functional Performance PSRS Procedural Safeguards and Referral Service PS Program Specialists PWN Prior Written Notice RISE Resources in Special Education RLA Responsible Local Educational Agency RL Revenue Limit ROP Regional Occupational Program RSP Resource Specialist Program RSPS Regionalized Services/Program Specialist Services RS Regionalized Services RtI2

SACS Standardized Account Code Structure Response to Instruction and Intervention

5

SAI Specialized Academic Instruction SCIA Special Circumstance Instructional Assistance SDA Special Disabilities Adjustment SDC Special Day Class SEA State Educational Agency SEEDS Special Education Early Delivery System SEIS Special Education Information System SELPA Special Education Local Plan Area SEMA Special Education Maintenance of Effort Actuals to Actual SEMB Special Education Maintenance of Effort Budget to Actuals SESR Special Education Self-Review SH Severe Handicap SIP School Improvement Plan SLD Specific Learning Disability SLI Speech/Language Impairment SLP Speech/Language Pathologist SLPA Speech/Language Pathology Assistant SNF Skilled Nursing Facility SOP State Operated Programs (Diagnostics Centers, State Special Schools SOP Summary of Performance SPI Superintendent of Public Instruction SPP State Performance Plan SSC School Services of California SSID State Student Identifier STAR State Testing and Reporting STRS State Teachers Retirement System TBI Traumatic Brain Injury TDS Therapeutic Day School TEACCH Treatment and Education of Autistic and Communication Handicapped Children SELPA Special Education Local Plan Area VI Visual Impairment WOF Written Offer of FAPE

6

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY CHECKLIST EXAMPLES OF ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

California Department of Education

Note: This list is intended to provide examples of assistive technology and should not be misconstrued as a mandate for payment by any agency, including: local education agencies, California Children's Services, the California Departments of Rehabilitation, Developmental Services, or Education.

Writing

Mechanics of Writing Pencil/pen with adaptive grip Adapted paper (e.g., raised line, highlighted lines) Slantboard Typewriter Portable word processor Computer Other _________________________

Alternate Computer Access

Keyboard with easy access Keyguard Arm support Track ball/track pad/joystick with on screen keyboard Alternate keyboard Mouth stick/head pointer with standard/alternate keyboard Head mouse/head master/tracker with on screen keyboard Switch with Morse code Switch with scanning Voice recognition software Word prediction to reduce keystrokes Other _________________________

Composing Written Material

Word cards/word book/word wall Pocket dictionary/thesaurus

7

Electronic/talking electronic dictionary/thesaurus/spell checker Word processor with spell checker/grammar checker Word processor with word prediction to facilitate spelling and sentence

construction Talking word processor for multisensory typing Voice recognition software Multimedia software for expression of ideas (assignments) Other _________________________

Reading, Studying and Math

Reading

Changes in text size, spacing, color, background color Use of pictures with text Book adapted for page turning (e.g., page fluffers, 3-ring binder) Talking electronic device to pronounce challenging words Scanner with talking word processor Electronic books Other _________________________

Learning/Studying

Print or picture schedule Low tech aids to find materials (e.g., index tabs, color coded folders) Highlight text (e.g., markers, highlight tape, ruler, etc.) Voice output reminders for assignments, steps of task, etc. Software for manipulation of objects/concept development input device (e.g.,

switch, touch window) Software for organization of ideas and studying Recorded material (e.g., books on tape, taped lectures with number coded index) Other _________________________

Math

Abacus/math line Calculator/calculator with print out Talking calculator Calculator with large keys and/or large LCD print out

8

On screen calculator

Software with templates for math computation (may use adapted input methods)

Tactile/voice output measuring devices (e.g., clock, ruler) Other _________________________

Communication

Communication board/book with pictures/objects/letters/words Eye gaze board (eye gaze communication) Simple voice output device Voice output device with levels Device with speech synthesis for typing Other _________________________

Activities of Daily Living (ADL)

Adaptive eating devices (e.g., foam handle on utensil) Adaptive drinking devices (e.g., cup with cut out rim) Adaptive dressing equipment (e.g., button hook, reacher) Other _________________________

Mobility

Walker Grab rails Manual wheelchair Powered mobility toy Powered wheelchair with joystick, head switch or sip/puff control Other _________________________

Environmental Control

Light switch extension Use of universal link and switch to turn on electrical appliances (e.g., radio, fan,

blender) Radio/ultra sound/remote controlled appliances Other _________________________

9

Recreation and Leisure

Adapted toys and games (e.g., toy with adaptive handle)

Use of battery interrupter and switch to operate a toy Adaptive sporting equipment (e.g., lighted/bell ball, velcro mitt) Universal cuff to hold crayons, markers, paint brush Modified utensils (e.g., rollers, stampers, scissors) Arm rest to support arm for drawing/painting Drawing/graphic program on computer Playing games on the computer Music software on computer Other _________________________

Vision

Eye glasses Magnifier Large print books Screen magnifier (mounted over screen) Screen color cornets Screen magnification software CCTV (closed-circuit television) Screen reader Braille keyboard and note taker Braille translation software Braille printer Other _________________________

Hearing

Hearing aid Classroom amplification Captioning Signaling device (e.g., vibrating pager) TDD/TTY for phone access Screen flash for alert signals on computer Other _________________________

10

Positioning and Seating

Non-slip surface on chair to prevent slipping Bolster, rolled towel, blocks for feet Adapted/alternate chair, side lyer, stander Custom fitted wheelchair or insert Other _________________________

11

New High School Graduation Requirements

Recommended Procedures Per action by the Governor, students with IEPs who have met all other graduation requirements shall be eligible to receive a valid high school diploma as of July 1, 2009. This decision shall remain in effect until the State Board of Education approves an alternative assessment process for these students (anticipated later this school year).

For students who exited high school or a transition program in June, 2009 or at the end of ESY, and who have met all other graduation requirements, the following procedure is recommended:

1. Require the student to re-enroll in the district and enroll the student into either the local high school or other district program, i.e. Adult Ed.; ROP; Workability; specific class related to area of need. Note: To collect ADA, you may need to enroll the student for at least the minimum day (4 hours per day).

2. Reactivate their records, transcripts and file, making sure they appear in your district’s data base, the same system that does credit and graduation checks/transcripts.

3. Hold an IEP (amendment or full IEP as appropriate based on previous IEP), to re-establish special education services. Utilizing existing data to the maximum extent possible.

4. Develop a program for the student to address transition needs:

• Student does not have to attend school daily unless you plan to collect ADA.

• Select a remedial class, alternative Ed class with special education consultation, independent study with special education consultation, work experience, etc.

• All school rules regarding attendance and discipline apply and failure to adhere to rules may impact placement, services and completion of IEP requirements.

5. Encourage the student to take the CAHSEE this fall (not required). Enrollment in a preparatory class is also appropriate.

6. Hold a second IEP amendment during this fall semester.

• This is an “exit IEP”.

• Complete credit check/graduation check.

• Notify family and student of anticipated exit date.

• Document that student is eligible for a diploma based on the current CDE guidance if IEP requirements are met during this semester (along with all other graduation requirements). Note: for Independent study: If you district allows a student to complete the class mid-semester for other students, then this applies to the student with an IEP as well.

• Obtain signatures.

• Assure that SEIS and CASEMIS are completed.

7. Exit the student at the end of the semester or as specified on the IEP once the items above have been met.

8. Assure that the district’s database via the school database is current and reflects graduation requirements as having been met.

9. Issue the diploma and allow student to participate in graduation ceremonies per district policies.

12

GLOSSARY OF SPECIAL EDUCATION TERMINOLOGY "A Child with a Disability": A student who has been properly evaluated in accordance

with regulations who is found to have a disability which results in the need for special education and related services.

Academic Performance Index (API): The cornerstone of California's Public Schools

Accountability Act of 1999; measures the academic performance and growth of schools on a variety of academic measures.

Accommodations in Statewide Assessment: Changes in format, response, setting, timing

or scheduling that do not alter in any significant way what the test measures or the comparability of scores.

Adapted Physical Education (APE): This related service is for students with disabilities

who require developmental or corrective instruction.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): The measurement defined by the No Child Left Behind Act that allows the U.S. Department of Education to determine how every public school and school district in the country is performing academically according to results on standardized tests.

Administrative Law Judge (ALJ): Independent Administrative Law Judges who preside

over special education due process hearings in California. Administrative Unit (AU): The responsible local education agency where the SELPA office

is located and where the state and federal funding is allocated. Age of Majority: Rights are transferred from the parent to the student on the student's 18th

birthday. This must be addressed by the IEP team prior to the student reaching age 18.

Alternate Curriculum: The alternate curriculum is used for students with moderate to severe disabilities to access the seven core areas of the California State Frameworks

American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA): The American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act

is an effort to jumpstart the economy, save and create millions of jobs. The Act provides for unprecedented levels of transparency and accountability.

Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC): Communication by means other than speech

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): ADR is an informal process for resolving conflicts

between districts and parents of students with disabilities. San Mateo County SELPA's

13

model consists of the following components: (a) Expanded IEP (b) Facilitated IEP, and (c) Solutions Conference.

American with Disabilities Act (ADA): This act prohibits discrimination of individuals

based on disability. It requires public transportation services to be accessible to individuals with disabilities and prohibits discrimination in employment of qualified individuals with disabilities. Annual Yearly Progress (AYP): Under NCLB, each State establishes a definition of "adequate yearly progress" (AYP) to use each year to determine the achievement of each school district and school. The new definition of AYP is diagnostic in nature, and intended to highlight where schools need improvement and should focus their resources.

Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA): The design, implementation, and evaluation of systematic environmental modifications for the purpose of producing socially significant improvements in and understanding of human behavior based on the principles of behavior identified through the experimental analysis of behavior. It includes the identification of functional relationships between behavior and environments. It uses direct observation and measurement of behavior and environment. Contextual factors, establishing operations, antecedent stimuli, positive reinforcers, and other consequences are used, based on identified functional relationships with the environment, in order to produce practical behavior change.

Assistive Technology Device: Any item, piece of equipment, or product system that is

used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disability.

Behavioral Health and Recovery Services (BHRS): This is the name of County Mental

Health in San Mateo County. Behavior Intervention Case Manager (BICM): A certificated person who has been trained

in behavior analysis with an emphasis on positive behavior interventions. . Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP): Systematic implementation of procedures that result in lasting positive changes in a student's behavior.

Board Certified Behavioral Analyst (BCBA): The BCBA is responsible for the ongoing training of teachers/school personnel in the implementation of the school based treatment plan which focuses on social skills and/ or behavioral modification, dependent on the child's individual needs. California Alternate Performance Based Assessment (CAPA): This is the alternate assessment for students who cannot participate on the CAT-6. This is for students with the most severe disabilities.

14

California Modified Assessment (CMA): The California Modified Assessment (CMA) is a

grade-level assessment for students who have an individualized education program (IEP), are receiving grade-level instruction, and, even with interventions, will not achieve grade-level proficiency within the year covered by the student's IEP.

California Children Services (CCS): Agency which provides medically necessary physical and occupational therapy for students eligible under CCS criteria.

California English Language Development Test (CELDT): Students in kindergarten through grade twelve whose home language is not English are required by law to take an English skills test. In California, the test is called the CELDT. This test helps schools identify students who need to improve their skills in listening, speaking, reading, and writing in English. Schools also give the test each year to students who are still learning English.

California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS): A longitudinal data system used to maintain individual-level data including student demographics, course data, discipline, assessments, staff assignments, and other data for state and federal reporting.

California Longitudinal Teacher Information Date Education System (CALTIDES): CALTIDES will be a new comprehensive system environment that primarily entails integrating existing databases to enable the retention of longitudinal educator data to meet federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and other state reporting requirements, to facilitate assignment monitoring, and to conduct high quality program evaluations.

California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS): This is an information and retrieval system in special education, developed by the CDE Special Education Division. The system provides the LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCY a statewide standard for maintaining a common core of special education data at the local level. The SELP A assists districts with the collection of this data. Communication Severity Scales (CSS): The CSS are guidelines for the IEP team to consider in determining the type, frequency, duration, and location of speech/language services. The guidelines were developed by North Inland SELPA.

Community Based Instruction (CBI): A model for delivery of instruction in which the IEP goals are met in a “natural” age-appropriate setting. For example, math, sequencing, travel, and social skills may all be developed in a trip to the grocery store.

Community Advisory Committee (CAC): A committee composed of parents of students

with disabilities appointed by each district board. The CAC serves in an advisory capacity to the SELPA Governing Board.

15

Coordinated Early Intervening Services (CEIS): The IDEA allows and sometimes requires, LEAs to use funds provided under Part B of the IDEA for CEIS. This provision permits LEAs to use Part B funds to develop and provide CEIS for students who are currently not identified as needing special education.

Compliance Complaint: Complaint filed with the California Department of Education by a person who feels that a special education law has been violated. Most common would be a service as specified in an IEP that is not being implemented.

Designated Instructional Service (DIS): The federal term is related services.

Transportation and such developmental, corrective and other supportive services as are required to assist the child with a disability to benefit from special education, and to include and not limited to: speech/language therapy and audio logical services, psychological services, physical and occupational therapy, recreation including therapeutic recreation, counseling services, orientation and mobility services.

Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP): DRDP Assessment System is used for

preschool school children and includes the process of making naturalistic observations,

maintaining documentation, rating the DRDP instruments, and reporting data. The DRDP

focuses on 4 areas: children are personally and socially competent, children are effective

learners, children show physical and motor competence and children are safe and healthy.

Discrete Trial Training (DTT): A method of breaking down functions into single steps which are rewarded on a trial-by-trial basis.

Due Process: Procedural safeguards to ensure the protection of the rights of the parent,

guardian and the student under IDEA and related state and federal laws and regulations. Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy (DIBELS): The DIBELS measures were

specifically designed to assess 3 of the 5 Big Ideas of early literacy: Phonological Awareness, Alphabetic Principle, and Fluency with Connected Text.

Early Childhood Education (ECE): Early identification and special education and related

services that are provided to children ages 0-5. Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA): This act was reauthorized in 2002 as

NCLB. The intent is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal and significant opportunity to obtain a high quality education and reach, at a minimum, proficiency on challenging State academic achievement standards and state assessments.

Encroachment: The difference between the amount spent on a particular program and the

amount of categorical aid received for that program. It is the amount of unrestricted fund monies spent in support of a categorical program.

16

Evaluation: Procedures used by qualified personnel to determine whether a child has a disability and the nature and extent of the special education and related services that the 'child needs.

Expedited Due Process Hearing: A hearing that results in a written decision being mailed to the parties within 45 days of the request for the hearing, without exceptions or extensions. Extended School Year (ESY): Special education and related services that (a) Are provided

to a child with a disability; (b) Beyond the normal school year; (c) In accordance with the child s IEP; and, (d) Meets the standard of the State Educational Agency.

Facilitated IEP: A facilitated IEP is a component of the SELPA ADR process. District or

parents may request to have a facilitated IEP by contacting the SELPA. A facilitated IEP is developed by a collaborative team whose members share responsibility for the meeting process and results. Decision making is managed through the use of essential facilitation skills.

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA): The Family Educational Rights and

Privacy Act is a Federal law that protects the privacy of student education records.

Focused Monitoring and Technical Assistance (FMTA): The FMTA Consultants are assigned geographically. They are responsible for coordinating all monitoring and technical assistance activities for the districts and Special Education Local Plan Areas in their assigned counties, providing information, and facilitating access to technical assistance related to program monitoring and program implementation.

Functional Analysis Assessment (FAA): Is a comprehensive assessment of behavior done

by a SELP A certified behavior intervention case manager (BICM) when an IEP team finds that instructional behavioral approaches specified in the student's IEP have been ineffective.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): This is a medical privacy act that established national standards to protect the privacy of personal health information

High, Objective, Uniform State Standard of Evaluation (HOUSSE): An alternative

method to assessing teacher subject matter competency is the High, Objective, Uniform State Standard of Evaluation (HOUSSE). HOUSSE allows current teachers to demonstrate subject matter competency and Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) requirements through a combination of proven teaching experience, professional development, and knowledge in the subject acquired over time through working in the field.

17

Individualized with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): Federal law that ensures that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet the unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living. The Act was reauthorized in 2004.

Individual Program Plan (IPP): An annual-reviewed record of program and service needs

provided by the Regional Center (i.e.; respite care, behavior management training, etc.) Inclusion: Inclusion is educating each child, to the maximum extent appropriate, in the

school and classroom he or she would otherwise attend. It involves bringing the support services to the child (rather than moving the child to the services) and requires only that the child will benefit from being in the class (rather than having to keep up with the other students.

Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE): An evaluation conducted by a qualified

examiner who is not employed by the district responsible for the education of the child. Individualized Educational Program (IEP): Plan which describes the child's present level

of educational performance, sets annual goals and instructional objectives, and describes the special education program and related services needed to meet those goals and objectives if appropriate.

Individual Services Plan (ISP): The plan that is used for students who are enrolled in

private schools by their parents that describes the specific special education and related services that the LEA will provide to the child.

Individual Family Service Plan (IFSP): Each eligible infant or toddler has an IFSP. The

individual family service plan is in place of the IEP. . Individual Transition Plan (ITP): Plan that is included in the student's IEP beginning at

age 16 or younger that addresses transition needs and interagency responsibilities or linkages that are needed for the student to successfully transition from school to adult life.

Individual with Exceptional Needs (IWEN): A student who is eligible for special

education and related services under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

Informed Consent: In accordance with 34 Code of Federal Regulations and Education

Code: (1) Parent has been fully informed of all information relevant to the activity for which consent is sought, in his/her primary language or other mode of communication, (2) The parent understands and agrees in writing to the carrying out of the activity for which his. /her consent is sought, and the consent describes the activity and lists the record (if any) which will be released and to whom, and (3) the parent understands that the granting of consent is voluntary on his/her part and may be revoked at any time.

18

Interim Alternative Educational Setting (IAES): IAESs are intended to serve short-term, transitional purposes. With few exceptions, IAESs

serve as settings in which students with disabilities are placed pending either a return to the student’s current educational placement or a change in educational placement.

Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): In accordance with State and Federal law students

with disabilities will be provided special education and related services in a setting which promotes interaction with the general school population, to a degree appropriate to the needs of both. The concept of LRE includes a variety of options designed and available to meet the diverse and changing needs of students. The least restrictive environment is determined by the IEP team on an individual student basis. The principle of LRE is intended to ensure that child with a disability is served in a setting where the child can be educated successfully.

Low Incidence Disability: Severe disability with an expected incidence of less than one

percent of the total statewide enrollment. The conditions are hearing impairment, vision impairment, severe orthopedic impairment, or any combination thereof.

Mainstreaming: Refers to the selective placement of students with disabilities in one or

more general education classes and or extra-curricular activities. Manifestation Determination: If a disciplinary action is taken that involves a removal of

student with a disability that constitutes a change in placement then a review must be conducted of the relationship between the child's disability and the behavior subject to the action.

Maintenance of Effort (MOE): The general rule under MOE requirements is that districts

must spend the same level of state and local funds (or local funds only) on special education as in the prior year, either in terms of total or per-pupil expenditures.

Medical Therapy Unit (MTU): Space provided by local educational agencies for the

provision of medically necessary occupational and physical therapy provided by CCS therapists.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB): The No Child Left Behind Act, signed into law in 2002, has

expanded the federal role in education and set requirements in place that affect every public school in America, including those in California. At the core of No Child Left Behind are measures designed to close achievement gaps between different groups of students.

Non-Public Agencies (NPA): A private, nonsectarian establishment certified by the CDE

that provides contracted, related services to students with disabilities.

19

Non-Public Schools (NPS): A private, nonsectarian school certified by the CDE that enrolls students with disabilities pursuant to an IEP.

Notice of Insufficiency (NOI): If a due process hearing request notice is not does not meet

all of the requirements as specified in IDEA, the district may file a notice of insufficiency with OAH so that the issues of the complaint are more specific.

Occupational Therapy (OT): Services provided by a qualified occupational therapist that

includes improving ability to perform tasks for independent functioning. Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH): The Office of Administrative Hearings is the

public agency that handles due process hearings in California. Office of Civil Rights (OCR): Agency that ensures equal opportunity and accessibility for

users of programs and services that receive federal funding. Orientation and Mobility: Services provided by qualified personnel to students who are

blind or have a visual impairment to enable those students to attain systematic orientation to and safe movement within their environments in school, home and community.

Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP): The Office of Special Education Programs

(OSEP) is a component of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), which is one of the principal components of the U.S. Department of Education (ED). OSEP's mission and organization focus on the free appropriate public education of children and youth with disabilities from birth through age 21.

Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS): A form of alternative and augmentative

communication (AAC) that uses pictures instead of words to help children communicate. PECS was designed especially for children with autism who have delays in speech and language development.

Procedural Safeguards and Referral Service (PSRS): This is the unit in special education

division of the CDE that handle complaints. Prior Written Notice: A written notice that must be given to the parents of a child with a

disability a reasonable time before an LEA (a) Proposes to initiate or change the identification, evaluation or educational placement of the child or a the provision of FAPE to the child; or (b) Refuses to initiate or change the identification, evaluation or educational placement of a child or the provision of F APE to the child.

Procedural Safeguards and Referral Service (PSRS): This division of the California Department of Education, Special Education Division provides technical assistance information and resources for parents, school districts, advocates, agencies and others of

20

procedural safeguards regarding students between ages 3 and 21 with disabilities and their educational rights.

Procedural Safeguards: This is also known as Parent Rights. Procedural Safeguards must be given to the parents of child with a disability at a minimum (a) Upon initial referral for evaluation; (b) Upon each notification of an IEP meeting; (c) Upon reevaluation of a child; and (d) Upon receipt of a request for due process.

Program Specialist (PS): A specialist who holds a valid special education credential and

has advanced training and related experience in the education of students with disabilities. Referral: Written request that a student be assessed to determine whether he/she has a

disability that may require special education and/or related services to benefit from his/her educational program.

Related Services: See Designated Instructional Services. Resource Specialist Program (RSP): Instruction and services provided by a resource

specialist or special education specialist for students with disabilities who are assigned to general education classroom teachers for a majority of the school day.

Response to Intervention (RtI2): The response to instruction and invention (RtI2

Golden Gate Regional Center (GGRC): Regional centers are nonprofit private corporations that have offices throughout California to provide a local resource to help find and access the many services available to individuals with developmental disabilities and their families.

) model is also often called the Three-Tiered Model.

Section 504: Section 504 is a component of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. It is a civil rights

law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs and activities, public and private, that receive federal financial assistance. Any person is protected who (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, (2) has a record of such an impairment, or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment. Major life activities include walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, working, caring for oneself, and performing manual tasks.

Search and Serve: Active and systematic involvement by the educational community to

locate children who may need special education services beyond the regular curriculum and program options. This is also referred to as “child find”.

Solutions Conference: This is a component of the SELPA Alternative Dispute Resolution

Process. The solutions conference involves both a parent and a district representative utilizing a structured discussion approach with two trained mediators. The goal is to have

21

the parties work together to come to mutually acceptable agreement that will best meet the needs of the child. The solutions panel consists of a parent of a special needs child and an educator outside of your district.

Special Day Class (SDC): Intensive instruction for students with disabilities who require

special education instruction for more than 50% of the school day. Special Education: Specifically designed instruction, at no cost to parents, to meet the

unique needs of a child with a disability. Special Education Self-Review (SESR): Districts are required to go through a self review

process every 4 years to determine areas of non-compliance. The reviews are structured are focused on educational benefit.

Specialized Academic Instruction (SAI): Specialized Academic Instruction (SAI) is defined as:

“Adapting, as appropriate to the needs of the child with a disability the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction to ensure access of the child to the general curriculum, so that he or she can meet the educational standards within the jurisdiction of the public agency that apply to all children.”

Summary of Performance (SOP): This is provided to students upon graduating with a

diploma or aging out. Supplementary Aids and Services: Aids, services and other supports that are provided in

general education classes or other education-related settings to enable children with disabilities to be educated with typically developing peers to the maximum extent appropriate. These aids and services must be noted on the IEP.

Surrogate Parent: Individual who is assigned by the SELPA to act as a surrogate for the

parents, when no parent can be identified and the district, after reasonable efforts, cannot discover the whereabouts of a parent, or the child is a ward of the state under the laws of that state. The surrogate may represent the child in all matters relating to the identification evaluation, and educational placement and the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child.

Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA): Individual district, group of districts, or

districts and County Office of Education which forms a consortium to ensure that a full continuum of special education services is available to all eligible students within its boundaries.

Specialized Physical Health Care Services: Health services prescribed by the child’s

licensed physician and/or surgeon which are necessary during the school day to enable the child to attend school and are written into the IEP. Designated providers are appropriately trained and supervised as defined in Ed code.

22

State Operated Programs (SOP): Special schools operated by the California Department of

Education for the education of students with disabilities including individual assessment services and the development of individualized education programs for students who are deaf and/or blind.

State Performance Plan (SPP): The IDEA requires that each state submit a performance plan that evaluates the state’s efforts to implement the requirements and purposes of Part B of IDEA and describes how the state will improve such implementation. This plan is called the Part B State Performance Plan.

State Testing and Reporting (STAR): In California this consists of the California Standards

Test (CST) and the CAT -6. Students who are on a functional curriculum may take the California Alternate Performance Based Assessment (CAPA).

“Stay Put”: During the pendency of a hearing a child with a disability must remain in his

or her current educational placement unless the parents of the child agree otherwise. Therapeutic Day School (TDS): A special day class for students with emotional

disturbance where county mental health provides intensive counseling services. Transition: Process of preparing a student to function in future environments and

emphasizing movement from one educational program to another (e.g., infant program to preschool) or from school to work.

Transition Services: A coordinated set of activities for a student with a disability that (1) is designed with outcome-oriented process, that promotes movement from school to post-school activities. (2) Is based on the individual student’s needs, taking into account the student’s preferences, and interests.

Unilateral Placement: When a parent removes their child from a public educational

placement into a private placement outside the IEP process.

23

GRADES, REPORT CARDS, AND TRANSCRIPTS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

(Taken from CDE Website)

1. Should a student’s grade reflect that accommodations have been made for that student to access the general education curriculum?

No. A student’s grade should not reflect that accommodations have been made. Accommodations provide students with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate in the general education curriculum.

An accommodation is a change in the course, standard, test preparation, location, timing, scheduling, expectation, student response, or other attributes that provides access for a student with a disability to participate in a course, standard or test, and it does not fundamentally alter or lower the standard or expectation of the course, standard or test.

The Matrix of Test Variations, Accommodations and Modifications for Administration of California Statewide Assessments (Oct-2007; DOC; 2.2MB; 6pp.) has examples of accommodations.

2. May a student’s grade reflect that modifications have been made for that student to access the general education curriculum?

Yes. If modifications have been made to the curriculum of any course, it is important that the student’s grade reflect the student’s achievement in the modified curriculum, as long as modified grades are available to all students. However, any modifications to programming, instruction, and grading must be documented in the student’s IEP and be directly related to the student’s disability. To automatically give modified grades to all special education students would be discriminatory and potentially violate Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. A modification is a change in the course, standard, test preparation, location, timing, scheduling, expectation, student response, or other attribute that provides access for a student with a disability to participate in a course, standard or test, and it does fundamentally alter or lower the standard or expectation of the course, standard or test.

The Matrix of Test Variations, Accommodations and Modifications for Administration of California Statewide Assessments (Oct-2007; DOC; 2.2MB; 6pp.) has examples of modifications.

24

3. May some type of symbol or code be used on a student’s report card to indicate that the student has had a modified curriculum in the general education classroom?

Yes. A symbol or code may be used on a student’s report card to indicate that the student has had a modified curriculum in the general education classroom. However, this type of coding should not be used solely for students with disabilities. A policy should be developed that applies to all students.

4. May pass/fail grades be used for students with disabilities in the general education classroom?

Yes. A student with disabilities may be given a pass/fail grade as long as participation in this grading system is voluntary and is available to all students. In addition, the grading system must meet the student’s special needs and must be documented in the IEP.

5. May a student’s transcript indicate that the student participated in a modified curriculum?

Yes. The purpose of the transcript is to present an accurate picture of a student’s coursework. If the curriculum content has been modified, the transcript may reflect that modification through some type of symbol or code that indicates that the student received modified grades or completed work at a lower grade level. The explanation of the symbol or code can not indicate that the student has a disability or that the student is in special education. Information regarding a disability may be indicated on the transcript if the student or the parent of the student gives written consent for the information to be released to a postsecondary institution or employer.

25

Shasta County SELPA Guidelines for Transition from Elementary School District to High School District

When Elementary District High School District Late Fall Notify parents of high school LEA open houses or

orientations. High school LEAs (including charter school LEAs) that conduct school site-level activities (such as open houses and orientations) during the spring for prospective entering students will provide reasonable notice of such activities to the elementary districts.

January Send list of 8th Review list of 8 grade students with IEPs to high school district.

th grade students.

January Grant high school district temporary “read only” access to SEIS. Elementary districts may grant more than “read only” access.

Request temporary “read only” access to SEIS prior to the transition meeting. Elementary districts may grant more than “read only” access.

January Shall appoint representatives to serve as primary points of contact for coordinating the scheduling of Transition IEP team meetings.

Shall appoint representatives to serve as primary points of contact for coordinating the scheduling of Transition IEP team meetings.

January For students enrolled in NPS or private school, notify high school district of contact person.

January Provide list to high school districts of students that may require observation in order to determine appropriate placement.

January Collaborate with high school district staff to determine dates/times for Transition Meetings.

Collaborate with elementary school district staff to determine dates/times for Transition Meetings

February Collaborate with high school district staff to determine dates/times for high school teachers to visit elementary schools to review students’ files, observe students and meet teachers.

Collaborate with elementary staff to determine dates/times for high school teachers to visit elementary schools to review students’ files, observe students and meet teachers.

February Ask parents of students whether they intend to enroll in a charter high school and if so to identify the name of the charter school.

If the charter school is an LEA member of the SELPA, and if there remains a possibility of the student enrolling in that charter high school, a representative of that charter high school will attend the IEP Transition team meeting.

March Notice and host IEP Transition team meetings and shall ensure the presence of staff required to legally constitute an IEP team (including general education teacher).

Shall ensure the attendance of at least one district staff member/administrator who is knowledgeable of the district’s available programs and services and who is authorized to commit district resources.

March At the transition meeting hosting district will provide: • Meeting room with speaker phone if needed • Access to laptop and printer • Notice of Procedural Safeguard • Provide interpreter at Transition IEP team meeting if needed • Prepare paperwork and input into SEIS • Reconfirm that offer of FAPE will continue until the end of the school year; including ESY if if needed. • Get parent signature on IEP if not signed at the meeting.

Provide specific information during Transition IEP meetings regarding proposal of high school district services.

March After the IEP meeting offer the parents the opportunity to visit the program and placement that was offered.

May Remove high school from temporary access to SEIS. July Transfer the CASEMIS files of all eighth grade

students to the high school district. The elementary district will not

High school district will promote incoming students to 9

promote these student files in CASEMIS prior to the transfer of CASEMIS files.

th grade in CASEMIS.

August Obligation and offer of FAPE ends. Obligation and offer of FAPE begins.

26

McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youth The McKinney-Vento program is designed to address the problems that homeless children and youth have faced in enrolling, attending, and succeeding in school. Under this program, State educational agencies (SEAs) must ensure that each homeless child and youth has equal access to the same free, appropriate public education, including a public preschool education, as other children and youth. Homeless children and youth should have access to the educational and other services that they need to enable them to meet the same challenging State student academic achievement standards to which all students are held. In addition, homeless students may not be separated from the mainstream school environment. States and districts are required to review and undertake steps to revise laws, regulations, practices, or policies that may act as a barrier to the enrollment, attendance, or success in school of homeless children and youth. What is meant by the term “homeless children and youth”? The McKinney-Vento Act defines “homeless children and youth” as individuals who lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. The term Includes:

• Children and youth who are: sharing the housing of other persons due to loss of housing, economic

hardship, or a similar reason (sometimes referred to as doubled-up); living in motels, hotels, trailer parks, or camping grounds due to lack of

alternative adequate accommodations; living in emergency or transitional shelters; abandoned in hospitals; or awaiting foster care placement;

• Children and youth who have a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private

place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings;

• Children and youth who are living in cars, parks, public spaces, abandoned buildings,

substandard housing, bus or train stations, or similar settings; and

• Migratory children who qualify as homeless because they are living in circumstances described above.

27

SCHOOL PLACEMENT, ENROLLMENT, AND ELIGIBILITY FOR SERVICES

On what basis does an LEA make school placement determinations for homeless children and youth? Homeless children and youth frequently move, and maintaining a stable school environment is critical to their success in school. To ensure this stability, LEAs must make school placement determinations on the basis of the “best interest” of the homeless child or youth. Using this standard, an LEA must:

(a) Continue the child’s or youth’s education in the school of origin for the duration of

homelessness when a family becomes homeless between academic years or during an academic year; or for the remainder of the academic year if the child or youth becomes permanently housed during an academic year; or

(b) Enroll the child or youth in any public school that non-homeless students who live in the attendance area in which the child or youth is actually living are eligible to attend.

How does an LEA determine the child’s or youth’s “best interest”? In determining a child’s or youth’s best interest, an LEA must, to the extent feasible, keep a homeless child or youth in the “school of origin” unless doing so is contrary to the wishes of the child or youth’s parent or guardian. If an LEA wishes to send a homeless child or youth to a school other than the school of origin or a school requested by the parent or guardian, the LEA must provide a written explanation of its decision to the parent or guardian, together with a statement regarding the right to appeal the placement decision. Why is it so important to maintain a stable education environment for homeless children and youth? Changing schools significantly impedes a student’s academic and social growth. The literature on highly mobile students indicates that it can take a student four to six months to recover academically after changing schools. Highly mobile students have also been found to have lower test scores and overall academic performance than peers who do not change schools. Therefore, the McKinney-Vento Act calls for LEAs to maintain students in their school of origin to the extent feasible. What should a school district consider when determining the extent to which it is feasible to educate a homeless child or youth in his or her school of origin?

As stated above, to the extent feasible, a district must educate a homeless child or youth in his or her school of origin, unless doing so is contrary to the wishes of the parent or guardian. The placement determination should be a student-centered, individualized determination. Factors that

28

an LEA may consider include the age of the child or youth; the distance of a commute and the impact it may have on the student’s education; personal safety issues; a student’s need for special instruction (e.g., special education and related services); the length of anticipated stay in a temporary shelter or other temporary location; and the time remaining in the school year. What procedures must an LEA follow if a dispute arises between a school and a parent or guardian regarding placement of a homeless child or youth? If a dispute arises over school selection or enrollment, the LEA must immediately enroll the homeless student in the school in which enrollment is sought by the parent or guardian, pending resolution of the dispute. Similar provisions apply to placement of unaccompanied youth. Inter-district enrollment disputes should be resolved at the SEA level. Homeless families and youth may be unaware of their right to challenge placement and enrollment decisions. Therefore, the LEA must provide the parent, guardian, or unaccompanied youth with a written statement of the school placement decision and the appeal rights. The LEA must refer the unaccompanied youth, parent, or guardian to the LEA liaison, who must expeditiously carry out the dispute resolution process.

When enrollment disputes arise, it is critical that students not be kept out of school. Interruption in education can severely disrupt the student’s academic progress. To avoid such disruptions, LEAs need an established process for resolving school placement disputes. Permitting students to enroll immediately in the school of choice pending resolution of disputes helps provide needed stability. LEA homeless liaisons help ensure that disputes are resolved objectively and expeditiously. Written notice protects both students and schools by outlining the specific reasons for the school’s decision. It facilitates dispute resolution by providing decision-makers with documents to guide their determinations. In providing special services to homeless children and youth, how does a school or district avoid stigmatizing those children?

As stated above, a district or school may not segregate homeless children and youth from the mainstream school environment. Homeless children and youth are entitled to receive all of the services that are provided to their non-homeless counterparts and in the same setting as their non-homeless peers.

In some circumstances, it may be appropriate to provide additional services to homeless children and youth in a separate setting. In doing so, a district should be careful not to stigmatize these students. If a district does implement a supplemental program exclusively for homeless children, such as a shelter-based evening tutoring program, it should not be called “the homeless tutoring

29

program” or the “shelter tutoring program.” Instead, the district should use a name such as “Discovery Club” or “Homework Club” to avoid stigmatization. What are a school’s responsibilities for enrolling homeless children and youth? A school selected on the basis of a “best interest determination” must immediately enroll the homeless child or youth, even if the child or youth is unable to produce the records normally required for enrollment (such as previous academic records, medical records, proof of residency, birth certificates, or other documentation). The enrolling school must immediately contact the school last attended by the child or youth to obtain relevant academic or other records. If a child or youth needs to obtain immunizations, or medical or immunization records, the enrolling school must immediately refer the parent or guardian to the LEA homeless liaison, who must assist in obtaining the immunizations or records. The records must be maintained so that they are available in a timely fashion when the child enters a new school or school district. To facilitate immediate enrollment, timely transfer of records from school to school should also take into account procedures for State-to-State record transfers. The McKinney-Vento statute provides a broad mandate to States and districts to change policies or practices that act as a barrier to the enrollment, attendance, and school success of homeless children. It is important for them to review policies and practices on an on-going basis, so that new barriers do not prevent children from receiving the free, appropriate public education to which they are entitled.

What are some steps that LEAs can take to ensure immediate enrollment?

Homeless children and youth often do not have the documents ordinarily required for school enrollment. Enrolling them in school immediately provides these children and youth needed stability and also is a legal requirement.

To facilitate immediate enrollment, LEAs should consider the following practices:

• Train all school enrollment staff, secretaries, guidance counselors, school social workers, and principals on the legal requirements regarding immediate enrollment;

• Review all regulations and policies to ensure that they comply with the McKinney-Vento requirements;

• Develop affidavits of residence or other forms to replace typical proof of residency. Such forms should be carefully crafted so that they do not create further barriers or delay enrollment;

30

• Develop caregiver affidavits, enrollment forms for unaccompanied youth, and other forms to replace typical proof of guardianship. Again, such forms should be carefully crafted so they do not create further barriers or delay enrollment;

• Establish school-based immunization clinics or other opportunities for on-site immunizations;

• Collaborate with community-based or public agencies to provide school uniforms within a district and among neighboring districts;

• Accept school records directly from families and youth; • Contact the previous school for records and assistance with placement decisions; • Develop short educational assessments to place students immediately while awaiting

complete academic records; • Inform families and youth in a language they can understand or in an accessible format, as

appropriate, of their right to attend either their school of origin or local school; • Inform families and youth in a language they can understand or in an accessible format, as

appropriate, of their right to transportation and immediate enrollment; • Develop clear, understandable, and accessible forms for written explanations of decisions

and the right to appeal; and • Expeditiously follow up on any special education and language assistance referrals or

services. Are children who are awaiting foster care placement eligible for services under the McKinney-Vento Act? Yes, children who are awaiting foster care placement are considered homeless and eligible for McKinney-Vento services. Children who are already in foster care, on the other hand, are not considered homeless. LEA liaisons should confer and coordinate with local public social service agency providers in determining how best to assist homeless children and youth who are awaiting foster care placement. Are children displaced from their housing by naturally occurring disasters eligible for services under the McKinney-Vento Act? When children and their families are displaced from their housing as a result of a natural disaster, there is often a period of instability in which various private organizations and local, State, and Federal agencies provide assistance. SEAs and LEAs should determine such children’s eligibility for McKinney-Vento services on a case-by-case basis. In making this determination, they should take into consideration the services that are available through these other sources.

Following a disaster, one of the LEA’s first priorities is to re-open impacted schools as soon as possible and take steps to normalize school routines. LEAs should then proceed to examine whether children who have been displaced by the natural disaster are eligible for McKinney-Vento

31

services on a case-by-case basis. In such circumstances, the Department would provide technical assistance and other assistance, as available, to help the LEA. What responsibilities do SEAs and LEAs have regarding providing transportation services to homeless children and youth? SEAs and LEAs are responsible for reviewing and revising policies, including transportation policies, that may act as barriers to the enrollment and retention of homeless children and youth in schools in the State. Under the McKinney-Vento Act, homeless children and youth are entitled to receive the transportation and other services that are available to non-homeless students. SEAs and LEAs must adopt policies and practices to ensure that transportation is provided, at the request of the parent or guardian (or, in the case of an unaccompanied youth, the liaison), to or from the “school of origin” (see definition in Appendix A) in accordance with the following requirements:

• If the homeless child or youth continues to live in the area served by the LEA in which the school of origin is located, that LEA must provide or arrange for the child’s or youth’s transportation to or from the school of origin.

• If the homeless child or youth continues his or her education in the school of origin

but begins living in an area served by another LEA, the LEA of origin and the LEA in which the homeless child or youth is living must agree upon a method to apportion the responsibility and costs for providing the child with transportation to and from the school of origin. If the LEAs cannot agree upon a method, the responsibility and costs for transportation are to be shared equally.

How can LEAs ensure that the education of homeless students is not disrupted during inter-district transfers?

LEAs should have in place inter-district (and inter-State, where appropriate) agreements that address potential transportation issues that may arise as homeless students transfer from one district to another.

Is an LEA required to transport homeless students to and from their school of origin, if needed, while enrollment disputes are being resolved?

Yes. The McKinney-Vento Act’s transportation requirements apply while disputes are being resolved. Therefore, at the request of the parent or guardian (or in the case of an unaccompanied youth, the liaison), the LEA must provide or arrange for transportation to and from the school of origin. Inter-district transportation disputes should be resolved at the SEA level.

32

If an LEA does not provide transportation to non-homeless students, is it required to transport homeless students?

Yes. As discussed above, the statute not only requires an LEA to provide comparable services, including transportation services, to homeless students, it also requires an LEA, at the request of a parent or guardian, to provide or arrange for transportation to and from the school of origin.

Do LEA transportation responsibilities apply to all LEAs in the State or only to those LEAs that receive a McKinney-Vento subgrant?

This requirement applies to all LEAs in the State.

Does McKinney-Vento require an LEA to provide transportation services to homeless children attending preschool? To the extent an LEA offers a public preschool education, McKinney-Vento requires that homeless children have equal access to that preschool education as provided to non-homeless children. Furthermore, the statue requires that the services provided to homeless children be comparable to those provided to non-homeless children. Thus, if an LEA provides transportation for non-homeless preschool children, it must also provide comparable transportation services for homeless preschool children.

The above information was taken from:

Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program Title VII-B of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as Amended By The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 Non-Regulatory Guidance

33

Category of Effect Description

Separation from Classmates Student with a disability and paraeducator are seated together or work together, creating separation from other students and/or the rest of the classroom

Unnecessary Dependence Student become “prompt dependent” – hesitate and/or less willing to participate without paraeducator direction, prompting or cueing

Interference with Peer Interactions Physical presence of paraeducator can create social, physical or symbolic barriers that interfere with interactions between student and classmates

Insular Relationships Student and paraeducator do most things together to the exclusion of other peers and staff

Feeling Stigmatized Student expresses embarrassment/discomfort about having a paraeducator; feels that it makes him/her stand out from others

Limited Access to Competent Instruction

Paraeducators are not necessarily skilled in providing competent academic or social instruction; paraeducators may do some or most of the work for the students they support

Interference with Teacher Engagement Teachers tend to be less involved when student has a paraeducator because individualized attention is already available; teacher may feel unskilled or hesitant to work with a student with a disability

Loss of Personal Control Paraeducators do so much for the student that the student does not consider or exercise choices that are typical for other non-disabled students

Loss of Gender Identity Student is treated as the gender of the paraeducator (e.g., male student taken into female bathroom)

May Provoke Problem Behaviors Student may express his/her dislike of paraeducator support by displaying inappropriate behaviors

Giangreco, M., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., & Fialka, J. (2005). Be careful what you wish for: five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraprofessionals. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28-34.

CH

APTER 21

- 32-

34

PROMOTION AND RETENTION OF STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

1. On what criteria should school districts base pupil promotion and retention decisions? State law requires every school district to have a written Pupil Promotion and Retention (PPR) policy approved by the district's governing board. Consistent with Education Code (EC) Section 48070.5(b), a PPR policy needs to include students' grades and other indicators of academic achievement. Students' results on the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program may be included as one indicator of academic achievement. However, STAR results may not be the exclusive criterion for promotion or retention, as they have not yet been certified for that purpose pursuant to EC Section 60648.

2. At what grade levels and for what subject areas must the district PPR policy have promotion and retention criteria? EC Section 48070.5 states that school districts' PPR policies must include criteria for promotion and retention at the following specified grade levels based on grades and other indicators of academic achievement designated by the district:

Between second and third grade Between third and fourth grade Between fourth and fifth grade Between the end of the elementary grades and the beginning of middle school Between the end of the middle school grades and the beginning of high school

(EC Section 48070.5[a])

The identification of students who should be retained or who are at risk of being retained should be based primarily on proficiency in reading between the second and third grades and between the third and fourth grades. For the remaining grade levels, identification should be based on proficiency in reading, English-language arts, and mathematics (EC Section 48070.5[c]). Districts may also set promotion criteria at other grade levels.

3. I was told that the district is required to use the 40th percentile on a norm-referenced test as part of its measures for promotion and retention. I cannot substantiate this in Education Code. The EC does not set a minimum level on any local test for promotion or retention purposes. If a school district (or charter school) incorporates test results among other factors, including grades, in its PPR policy, then the district (or charter school) may set minimum performance levels. Minimum STAR performance levels for promotion or retention have not been established pursuant to EC Section 60648.

35

4. May a school retain or promote a student without parent or guardian approval? Yes, a school can retain or promote a student without parent or guardian approval. However, the district PPR policy approved by the district's school board must provide an appeal process for parents who disagree with a principal's promotion or retention decision for their student.

5. Do parents have any right to retain their children for lack of academic progress when the school continues to promote the child to the next grade, especially at the middle grade level? A parent has a right to appeal the decision to promote or retain a child. State law requires districts to have promotion and retention criteria for students who are in their last year of middle school (most commonly eighth grade) and are ready to move on to high school (EC Section 48070.5[a][5]). Therefore, the district's PPR policy should provide for the identification of pupils who should be retained and who are at risk of being retained in their current grade when it is their last grade before high school based on grades and other indicators of academic achievement designated by the district (EC Section 48070.5[b]). More important than a decision to have the student promoted or retained at this level is the need for the student to receive additional instructional intervention that will help to improve academic performance.

6. Is there a high school promotion and retention process? The state does not require school districts to have student promotion and retention criteria beyond the last year of middle school to the first year of high school. However, districts may set criteria for promotion for successive grades in high school.

7. Is there a law or policy regarding the number of times a student can be retained? There is nothing in the EC that prohibits school districts from retaining a child in more than one grade. However, school districts are required to develop their own PPR policies under broad state guidelines. Some district PPR policies may prohibit children from repeating more than one elementary grade.

8. Are there state-approved forms for notifying students and parents when students are identified as at risk of retention, recommended for retention, or retained in grades one through eight? There are no state-approved forms for notifying parents when a student has been identified as at risk of retention, recommended for retention, or retained. Each school district is responsible for creating its own forms in accordance with its PPR policy.

36

9. What steps do I need to take to advance my child a grade level beyond her or his current grade level in the same school year? First, speak to the child's teacher. If the teacher agrees that the child needs to be challenged more academically, then request a meeting with the principal to discuss the child's placement. If the child has not already been identified as gifted and talented and the district has a Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program, ask that he or she be assessed for the program. Some districts permit GATE students to take one or more subjects (for example, mathematics) in a classroom one grade level above their current grade level.

10. Is there a test that a child can take for promotion from fifth grade to sixth grade toward the end of the school year but about a month before fifth grade will end? Or must the child complete the entire school year in order to promote to the next year? No such exam or use of exams is required or encouraged by the state. It would be up to your child's teacher and school principal, in accordance with school district policies, to decide whether or not this is practical for your child and whether the district has a test that would suffice for this purpose.

Taken from: FAQs — Pupil Promotion & Retention, California Department of Education

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/pr/faqppr.asp

37

RESOLUTION SESSIONS

PROCESS AND

RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES

Revised July 2008

Prepared by: Pamela Ptacek

38

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction and OAH Contact Information……………………………………………………..3 OAH Contact Information…………………………………………………………………………..3 Due Process Timelines………………………………………………………………………………4 Resolution Period (30 Days)…………………………………………………………………..4 Due Process Period (45 Days)………………………………………………………………...4 Resolution Session Description………………………………………………………...................5 Recommended Process for Resolution Session………………………………………………….6 Purpose of Resolution Session…………………………………………………………..........6 Recommended Agenda for Resolution………………………………………………….........6 Resolution Session Chart……………………………………………………………………..8 Writing Agreements………………………………………………………………………………….9 Sample Letter to Propose Resolution Session……………………………………………………10 Intent Regarding Resolution Session……………………………………………………………..11 Sample Interim Settlement Agreement…………………………………………………………..12 Sample Settlement & Release Agreement…………………………………………………….....15

39

Introduction Under federal law a Resolution Session is required when a parent files for due process. The intent of the Resolution Session is to clarify and resolve issues in order to reach an agreement. This meeting is required unless both parties agree in writing

not to hold a meeting.

Contact Information All hearing requests will go to the: Office of Administrative Hearings Special Education Client 1102 Q Street 4th

Sacramento, CA 95814 Floor

Phone: (916)323-6876 FAX: (916)322-8014 Web Page: www.oah.dgs.ca.gov The following forms are available on the OAH Website: Request for Mediation and Due Process Hearing Form

Brief Summary of Reason for Request

Proposed Resolution of the Problem State Above

40

Due Process Timelines

Resolution Period (30 Days)

• Parent submits due process complaint to the LEA and OAH

• The LEA provides a written response to the parent within 10 days (Prior Written Notice Form) which includes:

− An explanation of why the agency proposed or refused to take the action raised in the complaint.

− A description of other options that the IEP Team considered and the reasons why those options were rejected.

− A description of each evaluation procedure, assessment, record, or report the agency used as a basis for the proposed or refused action.

− A description of the factors that is relevant to the agency’s proposal or refusal.

• If the due process complaint does not give the LEA sufficient notice of the nature of the problem(s) at issue and the proposed resolution(s), within 15 days of receiving the complaint, the LEA may file a Notice of Insufficiency (NOI) with OAH in an attempt to clarify the issues

• OAH notifies parent within 5 days of sufficiency of description of issues after receiving

the NOI from the LEA

• The LEA will hold a Resolution Session within 15 days of receiving notice of the parents’ due process complaint prior to the initiation of the due process hearing unless both parties agree otherwise in writing or agree to use the mediation process.

• Within 30 days: Issues must be resolved or Due Process Hearing will resume or state will

offer state level mediation Due Process Period (45 Days)

• State Level Action o OAH will conduct a hearing or

• Written Order o A written order will be published unless the parties reach a written settlement

agreement prior to publication, and o The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) concurs that all issues have been addressed

to satisfy the requirements of law

41

Resolution Session

Pursuant to Proposed USDOE Regulations for IDEA 2004 Within 15 days of receiving notice of parents’ due process complaint, and prior to initiation of a due process hearing, the LEA must convene a Resolution Session with the parent and the relevant member or members of the IEP Team who have specific knowledge of the facts identified in the due process complaint. The LEA may not include an attorney of the LEA unless the parent is accompanied by an attorney. The purpose of the meeting is for the parents of the child to discuss their due process complaint, and the facts that form the basis of the due process complaint, so that the LEA has the opportunity to resolve the dispute that is the basis for the complaint. The Resolution Meeting need not be held if the parents and the LEA agree in writing to waive the meeting, or the parents and the LEA agree to use the State mediation process. If a resolution to the dispute is reached in the Resolution Meeting, the parties execute a legally binding agreement that is signed by both parties and a representative of the LEA that has authority to the bind the LEA. This agreement is enforceable in any State court of competent jurisdiction or in a district court of the United States. There is an agreement review period of 3 business days. Either party may void the agreement within 3 business days of the agreement’s execution.

42

Recommended Process for Resolution Sessions The Resolution Session should be a structured meeting controlled by a designated facilitator with the primary goal of clarifying issue(s), determining if solution(s) can be achieved, and designating the issue(s) for hearing if no agreement to solution(s) can be achieved. It is recommended that LEAs use a neutral facilitator to lead the resolution session. This could be an administrator or program specialist from another LEA. The facilitator should be specifically trained in conducting this type of meeting and should not have prior involvement in the case. The neutral facilitator need not see or review information about the case except to review the Parent letter requesting a hearing or complaint process and the district’s written response. Specific timelines are noted in the law and require prompt response. See the following section on timelines. Every effort should be made by the facilitator to support the parties in improving their relationship and identifying better ways to communicate and resolve issues that may arise in the future. However, where parties are clearly committed to specific positions, the responsibility for resolution is with the due process complaint process. The LEA is responsible for the implementation of any agreement and/or hearing/complaint activity. Purpose of Resolution Session

• Articulate and Clarify Issues • Explore the LEA response • Identify Options for Resolution • Where agreement is reached, write a settlement agreement • Develop an Action Plan and assign responsibility • Communicate the outcome to Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH)

Recommended Agenda for Resolution Sessions

I. Introductions II. Opening Comments III. Description of Process IV. Ground Rules V. Resolution Process

A. Nature of the Problem - Ask: What is the issue? Address FAPE issues first

B. Proposed Resolution - Explore specific concerns, examples, and expectations for resolution

43

C. Response - Ask: What is the LEA’s response? D. Agreement - Seek opportunity to resolve issue E. Repeat sequence for each issue

VI. Closure a. Written Agreements b. Written notice to CDE or OAH c. Follow Up with Action Plan to assign staff to complete agreement( Action Plan

Form)

44

RESOLUTION SESSION CHART

Nature of the Problem Proposed Resolution Response Agreements

45

Writing Agreements A written settlement agreement signed by both parties becomes a binding contract. After the three (3) business day review period for either party to rescind the agreement, it becomes binding on both parties. The agreement belongs to the parties and should reflect wording that the parties clearly understand and represent their interests in accepting the agreement. If a facilitator is used during this session, the facilitator should support the writing of the agreement to ensure that both parties understand the components of the agreement. It is important that the parties review both the substantive components of the agreement those that are technically required, and agree to the language. Districts are encouraged to use the Settlement and Release Agreement Template. Use only the sections that apply to the issues that are in dispute. For example, language addressing “Assessment” should be deleted if assessment is not at issue during the complaint or resolution process.

46

SAMPLE

LETTER TO PROPOSE RESOLUTION SESSION

Dear : On [insert] the [insert] School District received a copy of your complaint requesting a due process hearing regarding student name. When a parent initiates a complaint for a due process hearing, a district must schedule a preliminary resolution meeting within 15 days of receipt of the complaint, per 20 U.S.C. 1415. The purpose of the meeting is to give a parent an opportunity to discuss the due process complaint and the facts on which the complaint is based with the district; and to give the district an opportunity to resolve issues early in the process. At the resolution conference, a district must have a representative present with authority to resolve the complaint. Further, at this meeting, the district cannot have legal counsel present, unless the parent decides to bring legal counsel. If an agreement is reached at the resolution conference, the parent and/or the district will have 3 business days to void the agreement. If an agreement is not reached within 30 days, the due process hearing may proceed and the applicable timelines will begin. A district and a parent may also agree to waive this conference. This meeting is NOT an IEP meeting. We have scheduled a resolution conference for [insert] at the District Special Education Office. Please confirm your attendance or your intention to waive this meeting by completing the information below and returning it to me in the enclosed stamped, self-addressed envelope, or by faxing it to (951) 826-6943. Please also indicate whether or not you will attend this meeting with legal counsel so that the District can make appropriate plans. I look forward to meeting and discussing your complaint on [insert].

Sincerely,

Enclosure: Prior Written Notice

47

INTENT REGARDING RESOLUTION CONFERENCE

SCHEDULED BY [insert] SCHOOL DISTRICT [Date & time]

District Special Education

I, __________________parent/guardian of ___________________

_____ will attend the resolution conference

_____ waive the requirement of a resolution conference

If you are attending the resolution conference scheduled for _____ District Special Education

Office, please indicate whether you plan on attending the scheduled resolution conference

accompanied by legal counsel.

I, __________________parent/guardian of ___________________

_____ will not bring an attorney to the resolution conference scheduled for _____, at _____

am/pm, District Special Education Office

_____ will bring an attorney to the resolution conference scheduled for _____, at _____

am/pm District Special Education Office

_________________________________ ________________

Signature Date

48

Interim Settlement and Release Agreement This Settlement and Release Agreement (“Agreement”) is between _____, parents of _____, a minor who has received services through the ____ Unified School District collectively referred to as “Parties”. Parents and the District, in consideration of the promises made herein, agree as follows:

1. Nature and Status of Dispute a. Parents and the District disagreed about student’s special education FAPE related

services. As a result, on date, Parents filed a due process compliant with the California Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”) regarding several issues related to student’s educational program for the 200_/0_ school year. The case was assigned a file number of #N_____.

b. On ____, the Parties met for a resolution session to discuss Parents complaint, the

facts that formed the basis of the complaint, and to provide the District with an opportunity to resolve the complaint.

c. The purpose of this Agreement is to resolve any disputes caused by this action and

claims between Parents and the District/Service Providers related to student’s education, including special education and related services, through the date of this interim agreement on issues before and within the jurisdiction of the Office of Administrative Hearings.

2. Actions To Resolve Dispute

a. [List the first issue of the parent per the OAH filing.] [State what the parent is requesting for remedy of above issue per OAH filing.] [State District’s response to Parent’s proposed resolution:]

b. [List the second issue of the parent per the OAH filing.]

[State what the parent is requesting for remedy of above issue per OAH filing.] [State District’s response to Parent’s proposed resolution:] The parties, ____ USD and Parents, request Due Process complaint to be dismissed immediately upon receipt of this final agreement. Parents will notify OAH of the agreement to dismiss complaint. Parents and _____ USD representatives would like OAH to know that this issue was resolved at the Resolution Session on ______.

3. Waiver and Release of Claims

Parents and the District hereby fully release and discharge each other from all claims, damages, liabilities, rights and complaints of whatever kind or nature arising from or related to student’s educational program, including claims arising under the California Education Code, the individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 42 U.S.C. section 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Unruh Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, whether known or unknown, which either party now has or

49

holds, or at any time had or held against the other party, through the effective date of this Agreement. Parents hereby withdraw, waive and relinquish their claim for reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with this meeting, mediation and/or due process hearings.

4. Unknown Claims

Parents certify that they have read, and hereby waive the application of, the following provision of California Civil Code § 1542 TO ALL CLAIMS:

“A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known to him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.”

Acknowledging Civil Code section 1542, Parents agree to waive the protections of section 1542 in order to relinquish all claims described herein. Specifically, Parents understand and acknowledge the significance and consequence of this waiver of section 1542, as follows: (1) they may have additional causes of action, rights, or claims and attorneys’ fees or costs arising or occurring up to the effective date of the Agreement, or which they are not aware; (2) they may not make a further demand for any such claims, fees, or costs upon each other or their predecessors, successors, board, employees, or agents.

5. Technical Provisions

a. Conditions of Execution. Each party acknowledges and warrants that the Parties’ execution of this Agreement is free and voluntary.

b. Execution of Other Documents. The Parties agree to cooperate fully in the execution of other documents and the completion of any additional actions that may be necessary or appropriate to give full force and effect to the terms and intent of this Interim Agreement.

c. Non-admission. This Interim Agreement is not, and shall not be construed as, an admission by the District that it failed to provide or offer student a free appropriate public education.

d. Entire Agreement. This agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties.

e. Effective Date. This Interim Agreement is effective three (3) days following the date of signature by the Parties, if not rescinded by either party.

f. Governing Law. This Interim Agreement is entered into and shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California and the United States.

g. Severability. If any portion of this Interim Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision of this Interim Agreement.

h. Confidentiality. The Parties agree to keep the terms of this Interim Agreement confidential. However, for purposes of implementation and enforcement of this

50

Interim Agreement, the Parties mutually consent to the disclosure and admissibility of this Interim Agreement.

i. Execution by Facsimile or in Counterparts. This Interim Agreement may be signed in counterparts such that the signatures appear on separate signature pages. A copy, facsimile transmission or original of this document with all signature pages appended together shall be deemed a fully executed Interim Agreement.

Parent Signature Parent Signature _____________________Date: ___/___/___ _____________________Date: ___/___/___

District Signature(s) _____________________Date: ___/___/___ District Representative Signature(s) _____________________Date: ___/___/___ Facilitator Signature _____________________Date: ___/___/___

51

SAMPLE

SETTLEMENT AND RELEASE AGREEMENT

This Settlement and Release Agreement (“Agreement”) is between [PARENTS] (“Parents”), parents of [STUDENT], a minor, and the [INSERT] School district (“District”) (collectively referred to as “Parties”). Parents and the District, in consideration of the promises made herein, agree as follows:

1. NATURE AND STATUS OF DISPUTE

A. Parents and the District disagreed about [STUDENT]’s special education program. As a result, on [INSERT DATE], Parents filed a due process complaint with the California Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”) regarding several issues related to [STUDENT’S] educational program for the [INSERT] school years, including the extended school year. The case was assigned a file number of #_____.

B. Parents and the District disagreed about [STUDENT]’s special education program. As a result, on [INSERT DATE], Parents filed a complaint with the California Department of Education (CDE) regarding several issues related to [STUDENT’S] education program for the [INSERT] school years, including the extended school year. The case was assigned a file number of [INSERT FILE NUMBER].

C. On [INSERT DATE], the Parties met for a resolution session to discuss Parents’ complaint, the facts that formed the basis of the complaint, and to provide the District with an opportunity to resolve the complaint.

D. The purpose of this Agreement is to resolve any and all disputes, causes of action and claims between Parents and the District related to [STUDENT]’s education, including special education and related services, through the date of this agreement.

2. ACTIONS TO RESOLVE DISPUTE

[INSERT ANY OF THE FOLLOWING TERM(S), IF RELEVANT TO THE DISPUTE AND SETTLEMENT PROCESS] A. Assessment

Parents agree to sign an Assessment Plan, to allow the District to conduct assessment(s) in the area(s) of [INSERT]. Parents will sign an Assessment Plan no later than [INSERT DATE] or a copy of the Assessment Plan, signed and consented to by Parents, is attached to this Agreement.

The Parties agree to fund an independent education evaluation in the area(s) of [INSERT]. This evaluation will be provided at no cost to Parents. The assessor will be chosen by the District from the District’s list of approved independent assessors.

B. The Parties agree to the education goals drafted on [INSERT DATE].

52

C. Placement and Services

The child will be placed in [INSERT] class at [INSERT] school. Extended school year (“ESY”) will be provided for [INSERT] days, excluding holidays, from [INSERT DATE] to [INSERT DATE]. The District will provide the following related services during school days and including the extended school year:

[LIST ALL RELATED SERVICES (e.g. 1;1 AIDE, SPEECH THERAPY, TRANSPORTATION, etc.), INCLUDING FREQUENCY AND DURATION.]

The Parties agree to continue the educational goals drafted on [INSERT DATE].

The above placement and services are outlined on the IEP face sheet attached to this Agreement as Addendum 1. The Parties agree that the services outlined on the IEP face sheet attached to this Agreement as Addendum 1 constitute FAPE for [STUDENT] through [INSERT TERM OF AGREEMENT]. Unless mutually agreed to in writing by the Parties, there shall be no further modification of [STUDENT]’s placement or services during this period.

D. Reimbursement and Compensatory Education

The District agrees to provide the following compensatory services:

[LIST ALL COMPENSATORY SERVICES, INCLUDING THE PROVIDER, FREQUENCY AND DURATION.]

The District agrees to reimburse Parents in the amount of ${INSERT] for [INSERT SERVICE] within 60 days of the District’s receipt of proof of costs incurred. Appropriate documentation of costs incurred includes copies of cancelled checks, credit card receipts, paid invoices, etc. The District agrees to reimburse Parents in the amount of $[INSERT] to settle all claims related to [STUDENT]’s educational program through the date of this Agreement. A check in this amount shall be issued to “[INSERT NAME]” within 45 days of execution of this Agreement.

E. [INSERT] – [INSERT] School Year

The District will convene an IEP meeting by [INSERT DATE] to review [STUDENT]’s IEP and recommend a program and placement for the [INSERT] – [INSERT] school year.

53

[ALWAYS INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS]

F. Stay Put

If disagreements arise regarding [STUDENT]’s current educational program, the Parties agree that placement and services outlined on the IEP face sheet, attached to this Agreement as Addendum 1, constitute [STUDENT]’s “stay put” placement during the pendency of any of any proceedings related to the dispute.

G. Relocation

Parents agree that if Parents/[STUDENT] no longer reside within the District, Parents will immediately inform the District. Parents further agree that if Parents/[STUDENT] no longer reside within the attendance boundaries of the District, the District’s obligation to provide funding, programming or services under this Agreement terminate as of the date of relocation.

H. Dismissal of Due Process Complaint

Within 5 days of execution of this Agreement, Parents will notify OAH [CDE] of this Agreement and dismiss with prejudice their pending due process complaint.

3. WAIVER AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS

Parents and the District hereby fully release and discharge each other from all claims, damages, liabilities, rights and complaints of whatever kind or nature arising from or related to [STUDENT]’s educational program, including claims arising under the California Education Code, the individuals with Disabilities Education Ace (“IDEA”), 42 U.S.C. section 1983, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Unruh Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, whether known or unknown, which either party now has or holds, or at any time had or held against the other party, through the effective date of this Agreement. Parents hereby withdraw, waive and relinquish their claim for reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with this meeting, mediation and/or due process hearings.

Parents’ initials

4. UNKNOWN CLAIMS

Parents certify that they have read, and hereby waive the application of, the following provision of California Civil Code § 1542 TO ALL CLAIMS:

54

“A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known to him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.”

Acknowledging Civil Code section 1542, Parents agree to waive the protections of section 1542 in order to relinquish all claims described herein. Specifically, Parents understand and acknowledge the significance and consequence of this waiver of section 1542, as follows: (1) they may have additional causes of action, rights, or claims and attorneys’ fees or costs arising or occurring up to the effective date of the Agreement, or which they are not aware; (2) they may not make a further demand for any such claims, fees, or costs upon each other or their predecessors, successors, board, employees, or agents. Parent’s initials

5. TECHNICAL PROVISIONS

A. Conditions of Execution. Each part acknowledges and warrants that the Parties’ execution of this Agreement is free and voluntary.

B. Execution of Other Documents. The Parties agree to cooperate fully in the execution of other documents and the completion of any additional actions that may be necessary or appropriate to give full force and effect to the terms and intent of this Agreement.

C. Non-admission. This Agreement is not, and shall not be construed as, an admission by the District that it failed to provide or offer [STUDENT] a free appropriate public education.

D. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties.

E. Effective Date. This Agreement is effective three (3) days following the date of signature by the Parties, if not rescinded by either party.

F. Governing Law. This Agreement is entered into and shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California and the Untied States.

G. Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provisions of this Agreement.

H. Confidentiality. The Parties agree to keep the terms of this Agreement confidential. However, for purposes of implementation and enforcement of this Agreement, the Parties mutually consent to the disclosure and admissibility of this Agreement.

I. Execution by Facsimile or in Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts such that the signatures appear on separate signature pages. A copy, facsimile transmission or original of this document with all signature pages appended together shall be deemed a fully executed Agreement.

55

PARENT(S) SIGNATURE Dated: ___/___/___ [PARENT], Parent Dated: ___/___/___ [PARENT], Parent DISTRICT SIGNATURE Dated: ___/___/___ [AUTHORIZED LEA REP], [TITLE]

56

SECTION 504/ADA STUDENT ELIGIBILITY FORM* (SHADED AREAS DENOTE CHANGES DUE TO ADAA, EFFECTIVE 1/1/09)

Child’s Name: Birthdate: Names: about the child about the meaning of

evaluation data about accommodations/

placement options Note: Make sure there is at least one check in each column.

Sources of evaluation information (check each one used):

______ aptitude and/or achievement tests ______ teacher recommendations

______ adaptive behavior ______ others(specify):________________________________

1. Specify the mental or physical impairment _______________________________________________ (as recognized in DSM-IV or other respected source if not excluded under 504/ADA, e.g., illegal drug use)

2. Check the major life activity: ____seeing ____hearing ____speaking ____learning ____performing manual tasks ____breathing ____reading ____thinking ____concentrating ____sleeping ____bowel functions ____bladder functions ____digestive functions ____eating

Or specify alternative of equivalent scope and importance: _____________________________________________

3. Place an "X' on the following scale to indicate the specific degree that the impairment (in #1) limits the major life activity (in #2):

• Make an educated estimate without the effects of mitigating measures, such as medication; low-vision devices (except eyeglasses or contact lenses); hearing aids and cochlear implants; mobility devices, prosthetics, assistive technology; learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications; and reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids/services.

• Similarly, for impairments that are episodic or in remission, make the determination for the time they are active.

• Use the average student in the general (i.e., national) population as the frame of reference.

• Interpret close calls in favor of broad coverage (i.e., construing Items 1-3 to the maximum extent that they permit). Thus, for an "X" at 4.0 or below, fill in specific information evaluated by the team that justifies the rating:

5 Extremely

4 Substantially

3 Moderately

2 Mildly

1 Negligibly

4. If the team's determination for item #3 was less than “4,” provide notice to the parents of their procedural rights, including for an impartial hearing. If the team's determination was a “4” or above, the team should also determine and document the reasonable accommodations necessary for the child to have an "appropriate education" in accordance with Section 504 and the ADA. © 2008 — Permitted for customized use by school districts contingent upon including this acknowledgement on all copies: “*Adapted with permission from Perry A. Zirkel, author of Section 504, the ADA and the Schools.”

57

SECTION 504 GUIDANCE

Accommodations, supports and interventions for students eligible solely under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and Americans with Disabilities Act do not

fall under the jurisdiction of the San Mateo County SELPA or district special education. The SELPA is mandated to coordinate and facilitate services to students under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) only.

However, as Section 504 eligibility, requirements and services often overlap with those in the IDEA, the SELPA is frequently called upon to provide information and clarification about Section 504. Some students may be eligible for protections and services under IDEA and

Section 504; others are eligible under Section 504 only.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Section 504") is Congress’ directive to schools receiving any federal funding to eliminate discrimination based on disability from all aspects of school operation. It states, “No otherwise qualified individual with a disability …, shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance….” Because the school districts in the San Mateo County SELPA are recipients of federal funding, they are required to provide eligible students with disabilities with equal access (both physical and academic) to services, programs, and activities offered by its schools. There were two original main purposes to Section 504. The first purpose of Section 504 is to protect students from discrimination under federal law. The ADA provides the same protections. The laws assure access to educational services and the learning process that is equal to that given to students who do not have disabilities. All students who have a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities, have a record of such an impairment, or are regarded as having such an impairment, are protected from discrimination under Section 504 and ADA. Section 504 also requires districts to provide a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”) to those students who actually have a physical or mental impairment, that substantially limits one or more major life activities. The provision of FAPE is accomplished through the creation and implementation of a Section 504 Plan. Only those students who satisfy all three of these criteria are eligible for, and are provided, regular or special education and related aids and services under Section 504. The ADA does not require provision of FAPE through a plan.

Child Find

Each district is required to make information about Section 504 available to all families in the district. In addition, school personnel are required to identify and refer students who have or

58

are suspected of having a disability which would make him/her eligible for services under Section 504.

A student shall be eligible for a Section 504 Plan if they satisfy all of the following criteria: Eligibility

(1) Physical or Mental Impairment

A student must actually have a mental or physical impairment. A physical or mental impairment means: any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological; musculoskeletal; special sense organs; respiratory, including speech organs; cardiovascular; reproductive; digestive; genito-urinary; hemic and lymphatic; skin; and endocrine; or any mental or psychological disorder, such as mental retardation, organic brain syndrome, emotional, and specific learning disabilities. An impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active. The law does not limit eligibility to specific diseases or categories of medical conditions.

(2) Substantially Limits The student’s physical or mental impairment must substantially limit one or more major life activities. Section 504 does not specifically define the term “substantially limits.” It is subject to interpretation on a case-by-case basis. Nevertheless, an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a disability. An impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active. Whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity shall be made without regard to the ameliorative effects of mitigating measures such as: medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear implants or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy equipment and supplies; use of assistive technology; reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. Thus, the ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity.

(3) Major Life Activities Major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for one’s self, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working. A major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.

59

Learning, reading, concentration, thinking, and communication are typically, but not always, the major life activities utilized to determine Section 504 eligibility in the schools.

Referral

When a student is exhibiting academic, participation, attendance, social and/or behavioral problems the student’s school should consider interventions though its professional team process, which may be student Study Team (SST). This consideration should result in one of three things: general education interventions (such as tiered interventions in a Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI) model, a referral to assess for Section 504 eligibility, and/or a referral for a special education evaluation pursuant to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). If it is determined that the student should go through Section 504 Eligibility Review, copies of all intervention planning and reporting forms should be forwarded to site personnel responsible for developing the Section 504 Evaluation Plan. The parents should be given a consent form for evaluation under “Section 504 and Parent and Student Rights”. Parents also may refer the child for Section 504 consideration at any time.

Evaluation

The District shall evaluate a student who, because of a disability or suspected disability, needs, or is believed to need, special education or related services before taking any action with respect to the initial placement of the student in general or special education and any subsequent significant change in placement. Once the district receives the signed consent for assessment, the evaluation begins. There is no timeline in the law as to how quickly the evaluation shall be completed, although the law implies it must be “reasonable.” Case law seems to support a 60 day timeline as “reasonable” and 90 days as not reasonable. Therefore, adhering to a 60 day timeline is advisable. When selecting tests and other evaluation materials, the district must ensure that they are: validated for the specific purpose for which they are used; administered by trained personnel in conformance with the instructions provided by their producer; tailored to assess specific areas of educational need and not merely those which are designed to provide a single general intelligence quotient; and administered so as best to ensure that, when a test is administered to a student with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, the test results accurately reflect the student's aptitude or achievement level or whatever other factor the test purports to measure, rather than reflecting the student's impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills (except where those skills are the factors that the test purports to measure). An assessment must be administered in the student’s native language. The district may administer and use formal and informal measures as deemed necessary. Evaluation data may draw upon information from a variety of sources, including, but not limited to, observations,

60

testing, reports, district evaluations, medical records, letters from doctors, health care plans, school records, etc. If a medical assessment is necessary to determine the presence of a disability, the district must ensure that the student receives the assessment at no cost to the parents. A parent may choose to use his or her own resources to obtain a medical evaluation or arrange with the district for reimbursement for evaluation costs, however in no instance may a parent be required to pay for such an evaluation. As part of the evaluation process, the district may consider reports from doctors, therapists and others. Once the evaluations are completed, the District should schedule a Section 504 meeting to review the evaluations and to determine whether the student is eligible for a Section 504 Plan. The team should decide whether the student has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. If the team determines that the student is eligible to receive a FAPE under Section 504, the team should develop a Section 504 Plan. The team is made up of a group of individuals, including persons knowledgeable about each of the following: the student; the meaning of the evaluation data being reviewed; and available options for accommodations, supports and services. The team will generally include the parent/guardian and at least one of the student’s general education teachers, and, may include other teachers, individuals who can interpret the instructional implications of the assessment results, intervention team members, counselors, related service providers, the student, other school staff and administrators, and individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the student.

Section 504 Plan

Note on the plan the specific accommodations or interventions to be provided. (See Section 504 Form by Perry Zirkel) It is recommended that districts start with ideas of supports that can be provided at little or no extra cost using existing resources at the school, for example, changes in the way the information is presented or how the student is allowed to respond, or physical changes to the educational environment. Sometimes elements in a Section 504 Plan will result in additional costs to the district or school, such as additional adult support, specialists or changes to the school building. Although there

61

is no funding stream to school districts for these costs, failure to provide the services or supports would be a violation of the law. Occasionally, a student who is eligible under Section 504 will need special education and related services to address his or her needs. In this case, an evaluation for eligibility under the IDEA may be warranted. The Section 504 regulations do not specify a frequency of review, but note that districts should establish procedures for “periodic” review of plans. Note on the plan how often and by when the plan will be reviewed. In addition, a re-evaluation is required before a “significant change in placement.”

Inappropriate Uses of Section 504 Plans

• A parent/guardian and/or doctor presents the school with a disability diagnosis and a Section 504 Plan is written without first determining if the disability causes substantial limitation of a major life activity.

• A student is placed on a Section 504 Plan solely because the parent/guardian wants the

student to have additional time on college qualifying examinations (e.g., ACT, SAT). • A student is placed on a Section 504 Plan because the student has a record of

impairment or is regarded as being impaired, but the student does not actually have a disability that substantially limits a major life activity.

• A student fails to qualify for special education and related services under the IDEA, but

is automatically provided with a Section 504 Plan. • A student is automatically placed on a Section 504 Plan when the student no longer

qualifies for special education services under the IDEA without first qualifying based on Section 504 criteria.

• A student is placed on a Section 504 Plan as an alternative way to receive special

education and related services because the parent/guardian refuses to “label” his/her child by including him/her in a special education program; this may also apply in cases where parent/guardian has revoked consent to special education.

Discipline

In disciplinary situations, students who have a Section 504 Plan may be suspended expelled or placed in an alternative interim setting to the same extent these options would be used for children without disabilities. School personnel may also consider any unique circumstances on

62

a case-by-case basis when determining whether a disciplinary removal is appropriate for a child with a disability who violates a code of student conduct. However, Section 504 requires that, after a child with a disability has been suspended from his or her current placement for or ten (10) school days in the same school year, prior to any subsequent days of suspension prior to moving forward toward expulsion, a manifestation determination meeting must be held. The child’s parent/guardian must be invited to participate as a member of this manifestation determination meeting. At the meeting, the team will determine (based upon a review of all relevant information in the student’s cumulative file, the Section 504 Plan, any teacher observations, and any relevant information provided by the parent/guardian) whether the student’s alleged behavior was a manifestation of his/her disability by answering these questions:

• Whether the conduct in question was caused by, or had a direct and substantial relationship to the student’s disability; or,

• Whether the conduct in question was the direct result of District’s failure to implement the student’s current Section 504 Plan.

If the team answers yes to either question, the alleged misconduct shall be determined to be a manifestation of the student’s disability. However, if the team answers no to both questions, the alleged misconduct shall be determined not to be a manifestation of the student’s disability and the district may take disciplinary action against the student, such as continuing to suspend or recommending for expulsion, in the same manner as it would with a child without disabilities. If the student’s behavior is determined to be a manifestation of his or her disability, the district develops a positive behavior support plan for the student. If a positive behavior support plan has already been developed, the district will review the plan and modify it as necessary to address the behavior in question. However, regardless of whether a student’s behavior was a manifestation of the student’s disability, the district may determine, following assessment, that a change of placement is appropriate for the student. The district may proceed with this change of placement following notice to the parents; consent is not required for a change of placement pursuant to Section 504.

63

Component IDEA Section 504

Purpose

To provide federal financial assistance to state and local education agencies to assist them to educate children with disabilities.

To eliminate discrimination on the basis of disability in all programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

Who is protected?

All school-age children who fall within one or more of 13 specific categories of disability and who, because of such disability, need special education and related services (i.e., mentally retarded, hard of hearing, speech or language impaired, visually impaired, seriously emotionally disturbed, orthopedically impaired, other health impaired, deaf, deaf-blind, multiple disabled, specific learning disabled, autistic, or traumatic brain injured).

All school-age children who have a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits a major life activity have a record of such an impairment or are regarded as having such an impairment. Major life activities include walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning, working, caring for oneself and performing manual tasks and thinking concentrating, eating, sleeping, lifting, bending reading communicating. Section 504 protects a broader group of students than does the IDEA.

Duty to provide a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)

Both laws require the provision of FAPE. Section 504 defines FAPE more broadly than does the IDEA. Requires that FAPE be provided to only those protected students who, because of disability, need special education or related services.

Requires that FAPE be provided to only those protected students who, because of disability, need regular education accommodations, special. Education or related services.

Defines FAPE as special education and related services. A student can receive related services under the IDEA if and only if the student is provided special education and needs related services to benefit from special education.

Defines FAPE as regular or special education and related aids and services. A student can receive related services under Section 504 even if the student is in regular education full-time and is not provided any special education.

Requires a written IEP document with specific content and a required number of specific participants at the IEP meeting.

Does not require a written IEP document, but does require a plan. It is recommended the district document that a group of persons knowledgeable about the student convened and specified the agreed upon plan of services.

64

Component IDEA Section 504

Special Education vs. Regular Education

A student is protected by the IDEA, if and only if: because of disability, the student needs special education.

A student is protected by Section 504 regardless of whether the student needs special education. Some students protected by Section 504 are in regular education full-time and are not provided any special education.

Funding

Provides additional funding for protected students.

Does not provide additional funds. IDEA funds may not be used to serve students protected only under Section 504.

Procedural Safeguards Both laws require prior notice to parents or guardians with respect to the identification, evaluation and/or placement of protected students. IDEA procedures will suffice for Section 504 implementation.

Evaluations

Both laws require that tests and other evaluation materials: 1. Be validated for the specific purpose for which they are used; 2. Be administered by trained personnel in conformance with the

instructions provided by their producer, 3. Include those tailored to assess specific areas of educational need; and 4. Be selected and administered to assure that the test results accurately

reflect whatever factors the test purport to measure. Requires informed consent before an initial evaluation is conducted.

Same as IDEA.

Requires re-evaluations to be conducted at least every 3 years.

Requires periodic re-evaluations. IDEA schedule for re-evaluation will suffice.

A re-evaluation is not required before a change of placement. However, an IEP team should review current evaluation data, including progress towards goals and objectives when considering a significant change of placement. When data are insufficient to answer questions regarding the appropriateness of the special education and related services being considered, then a re-evaluation is required.

Requires re-evaluation before a significant change in placement.

Provides for independent educational evaluation at district expense if parent disagrees with evaluation obtained by school and hearing officer concurs.

No provision for independent evaluations at district expense. However, a district must carefully consider any such evaluations presented.

65

Component IDEA Section 504

Placement Procedures

When interpreting evaluation data and making placement decisions, both laws require districts to: 1. Draw upon information from a variety of sources; 2. Assure that all information is documented and considered; 3. Ensure that the eligibility decision is made by a group of persons

including those who are knowledgeable about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data and placement options; and

4. Ensure that the student is education with his/her non-handicapped peers to the maximum extent appropriate (least restrictive environment).

An IEP meeting is required before any change in placement.

A re-evaluation meeting is required before any "significant change" in placement

Grievance Procedure

Does not require a grievance procedure, nor a compliance offer.

Requires districts with more than 15 employees to, (1) designate an employee to be responsible for assuring district compliance with Section 504, and (2) provide a grievance procedure for parents, students and employees.

Due Process

Both statues require districts to provide impartial hearings for parents or guardians who disagree with the identification, evaluation or placement of a student Contains detailed heating rights and requirements.

Requires notice, the right to inspect records, the right to participate in a hearing and to be represented by counsel, and a review procedure.

Exhaustion

Requires the parent or guardian to pursue administrative hearing before seeking redress in the courts.

Administrative hearing not required prior to OCR involvement or court action; however, claim can be dismissed if issues are based solely upon underlying IDEA claims.

Enforced by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs. Compliance is monitored by OSPI and the Office of Special Education Programs.

Enforced by the U.S. Office for Civil Rights.

OSPI and CDE resolve complaints. OSPI has no monitoring, complaint resolution or funding involvement.

66

§ 504 ADA PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS NOTICE* For students eligible or suspected to be eligible solely under § 504 and the ADA, but not under

the IDEA, questions commonly arise as to compliance procedures with regard to parental notice. Not to be confused with the procedural safeguards requirements of the IDEA (34 C.F.R. §§ 300.503-300.504), the shaded contents below constitute the essential, or minimum, ingredients for such a form (per 34 C.F.R. §104.36). In addition, districts may wish to consider adding other, discretionary features, such as the following:

1) an introductory section, citing and describing the nondiscrimination obligation of § 504 and the ADA

2) more details about the l isted procedural rights, such as an explanation of the term “ educational

placement” and “ significant change in placement” in this pure (rather than overlapping IDEA) § 504/ ADA context and about the regulatory requirements for evaluation and placement

3) a list of the eligible child’s substantive rights, such as the § 504 definition of “ free and

appropriate education” and § 504 “ least restrictive environment” requirements for academic and nonacademic settings

4) a reference to the more general requirements, such as your grievance procedure and 504/ ADA

coordinator 5) perhaps most importantly, a final section and related procedure to document parents’ receipt

of this notice form

In accordance wi th Section 504 of the Rehabi l i tation Act of 1973 and the Americans wi th Disabi l i ties Act of 1990, the ________________________ School District provides you, as the parent or guardian, wi th the fol lowing procedural safeguards in relation to your chi ld.

1. You have a right to receive a copy of this notice upon the district's identi f i cation, evaluation,

refusal to provide an evaluation, educational placement, denial of educational placement and any signi f icant change in said placement of your chi ld.

2. You have the right to an evaluation of your chi ld i f the district has reason to bel ieve that your

chi ld has a mental or physical impai rment that substantial ly l imi ts learning or some other major l i fe activi ty …

a) Before the ini tial placement. b) Before any subsequent signi f icant change in placement.

3. You have the right to an opportuni ty to examine al l relevant records for your chi ld.

4. You have the right to an impartial hearing, wi th participation by you and representation by

counsel , concerning the identi f i cation, evaluation or educational placement of your chi ld.

5. You have the right to appeal the f inal decision of the impartial hearing of f icer to a court of competent jurisdiction.

________________________________________________________________________________________

* Source: PERRY ZIRKEL, SECTION 504, THE ADA AND THE SCHOOLS App. 5:9 (2004).

67

Section 504 Process Flow Chart

1. Student Referred by: Parents Intervention Planning Team/Grade Level Team/SST.

6. Periodically Re-Evaluate the Student: Before any significant change to the Plan. Including exiting student from Section 504 services, unless parent/guardian

revokes consent to Section 504. Provide parent “Parent Rights.”

5. Review the Student’s Section 504 Plan: Review and revise the student’s Section 504 Plan according to frequency noted

on Plan. Provide parent with “Parent Rights” upon each review.

4. Determine the Student’s Eligibility/Develop 504 Service Plan: Convene a Section 504 Service Plan team meeting using “Notice of Section

504 Team Meeting” Review evaluation results and determine eligibility using “Student Eligibility

Summary” form and “Rubric for Impact of Disability” if needed If yes, develop a “Section 504 Service Plan” for student. If no and parent disagrees, provide “Prior Written Notice” to parent/guardian. If yes, parent signs Service Plan Provide parent/guardian a copy of Service Plan.” Assign a case manager and time to review – indicate on Plan.

3. Upon signed consent evaluate the Student (within reasonable time frame): Evaluate the specific areas of the student’s educational needs. Use “Consent for Exchange of Information” to obtain outside service

providers’ reports

2. Decide Whether to Evaluate the Student: Does the school site know or suspect that, because of a disability, the student

may need special education or related aids or services to participate in or benefit from school?

If yes, provide parent/guardian with a “Consent for Evaluation” and “Parent Rights” and “Receipt of Parent/Student Rights.”

If no, provide parents with “Prior Written Notice” and “Parent Rights” and “Receipt of Parent Rights.”

68

RECOM M ENDATIONS FOR § 504/ADA PLANS Perry A. Zi rkel

© 2008

Interestingly, the relevant regulations do not mention “ accommodations” or a 504 Plan, much less a required designation, or name, for such a document; rather, they only require that the district provide each eligible student “ free appropriate public education” (FAPE), defined as “ regular or special education and related aids and services.”

1

For “ 504-alone” students, meaning those that are not also covered by the IDEA, it is advisable to have, for purposes of planning and proof, a § 504/ADA accommodations form –titled however your district chooses but showing that it covers both § 504 and the ADA.

The plan should be limited to those accommodations that are necessitated by the identified impairment, not just any accommodations that would benefit the student.

The prevailing judicial standard is “ reasonable accommodation,” which is the opposite of undue

hardship of fundamental alteration. Although neglected by many districts, the eligible child is also entitled to any necessary related

services as part of FAPE. In addition to identifying the child and specifying the necessary accommodations and related

services, the template, or form, for this purpose may contain other accountability features, depending on district discretion, such as the following:

• identifying, by name, the person(s) responsible for implementing each accommodation or

service • also identifying, in this case by role, the individual responsible for ensuring proper

implementation • listing an approximate time for review of the plan (typically at the end or start of the school

year, but the standard for periodic review is reasonableness, which is more flexible than the IDEA standard for IEP reviews

• providing a space at the bottom for the parent(s) to acknowledge receipt of or agreement with the plan

Be wary about including a checklist menu of accommodations directly in your form. On the one

hand, such a checklist invites over-identification of what is necessary in terms of the student’s disability (as compared with beneficial strategies that should be part of the child’s regular education program and subject to local, not federal, accountability). On the other hand, such a checklist often does not provide the specificity that OCR or a hearing officer might well expect if the parents choose to challenge the plan on the grounds of formulation or implementation.

Although high-stakes testing and the NCLB are undeniably a potent motivation, district should

be careful about agreeing to overdoing testing accommodations as either the basis for eligibility or as a short-range substitute for more effective long-range interventions for the child.

_________________________________________________________________________________ 1 34 C.F.R. § 104.33(a).

69

SAM PLE SECTION 504/ADA PLAN Student’s Name:____________________________________ School: ___________________________ Team (knowledgeable about the student, the evaluation, and the accommodations):

Identi f ied Impairment/ M ajor

Li fe Activi ty Necessary Accommodations

and/or Related Services Individual (s) Responsible for Implementation/M oni toring

Describe location of accommodations/ services if other than the regular classroom setting and justifying reason(s):

Beginning Date:__________________________ Ending (i.e., review) date: ___________________

I have received the Section 504/ADA Procedural Safeguards along wi th a copy of this Plan.

______________________________________________ ___________________ Parent/ Guardian Signature Date

70

A SAM PLING OF OTHER CONCERNS

Perry A. Zi rkel © 2008

OCR Enforcement – Parents of double-covered and 504-alone students may file a complaint w ith the regional OCR office, which triggers an investigation and resolution process that typically ends in either an informally mediated settlement or a formal “ letter of findings.” A lthough parents often fail to substantiate the alleged violations of § 504, the process can be costly to districts in terms of staff time and legal resources. Districts are advised to put in place procedures and practices that are proactive and preventive; nevertheless, the parents’ right to file a complaint may not be restricted in any way, including by the district’s grievance process, and districts should respond to OCR with cooperation and empathy while remaining firm – not fearful or intimidated – in terms of the specific requirements of § 504 and the ADA. Impartial Hearings – The most important procedural safeguard under § 504/ ADA is the right to an impartial hearing; yet, parents have only infrequently exercised this right thus far. Such requests often cause confusion, because the responsibility for such hearings – unlike those under the IDEA -- is the district’s, not the state’s. Beyond the basics of impartiality and the parents’ rights to counsel, the requirements for such hearing are more flexible than for those under the IDEA.

2

Moreover, unlike the IDEA, the district is ultimately responsible to arrange for such impartial hearings if the state does not, and there is not second tier of administrative review unless state law provides for it.

Ext racurricular Activi ties – The most active area of recent student litigation under §504/ ADA is interscholastic athletic eligibility.

3

The lessons in the case law for extracurricular activities more generally, including field trips, are 1) the courts are still divided about this issue, but the Supreme Court’s decision concerning the professional golfer, Casey Martin, seems to have shifted the balance in favor of plaintiffs except where the requested accommodation would consist of a fundamental alteration; and 2) consideration should be given to individualized waivers, which bend but do not break rules in light of the relationship to the disability and the reason for the rule.

Retal iation/Harassment – Another active area of disputes, more often via OCR complaints than court suits, is alleged retaliation, typically as a result of parent advocacy of their child’s § 504/ ADA rights, or harassment, predominantly in terms of hostile treatment of the child by personnel or peers. OCR and the courts use a multi-step process to evaluate such claims, including whether there was a causal connection between the parents’ advocacy (in retaliation cases) or student’s disability (in harassment cases) and the adverse action. A lthough districts have prevailed in the clear majority of the cases to date, having proactive procedures – including periodic staff training and prompt corrective action – is in the mutual interest of the district and the child with disabilities.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2 See, e.g., “ Basic Elements of Grievance Procedures and Impartial Hearings,” in ZIRKEL supra note 1,

at App. 4:30-4:31 (2000). 3

D iscipl ine Pol icies – § 504 and the ADA overlap with the IDEA such that they provide an alternate theory for double-covered students and particular confusion with regard to 504-alone students. Whereas the focus of IDEA discipline cases has been suspensions/ expulsions, parents have used § 504/ ADA in relation to a variety of forms of discipline. For disciplinary procedures other than suspensions/ expulsions, the keys are avoiding differential adverse treatment of students w ith disabilities and following the pertinent provisions of the child’s IEP or 504 Plan.

For an overview of the pertinent case law, see Perry Zirkel, Section 504 and the ADA: The Top Ten Recent Concepts/Cases, 147 WEST’S EDUC. L. REP. 764 (2000).

4

For suspensions/ expulsions, the primary question is whether the removals constitute a “ significant change in placement.” The standard is the same as under the IDEA: 11

71

consecutive days of removal or a cumulative pattern of days in the school year that is the functional equivalent to 11 consecutive days, which depends on 1) the total number of days, 2) the length of each of these removals, and 3) their proximity. For those removals that meet this standard, Appendices I and II show the differences between the IDEA, which controls for double-covered students, and § 504/ ADA, which controls for 504-alone students. The main differences are:

• whereas both require a manifestation determination (also known under § 504 as a relationship test), upon a removal of more than 10 consecutive days or an equivalent pattern of cumulative days in a school year, the team and criteria are much more detailed under the IDEA

• if the misconduct is a manifestation of the disability, § 504/ ADA provides a

stronger bar because – unlike the IDEA – it has no 45-day interim placement authorized for weapons or other such danger-based violations

• the use or possession of alcohol or il legal drugs is an exception to any such

procedural protection under § 504/ ADA

• if the misconduct is not a manifestation of the disability, the 504-alone child is only entitled to the same notice, hearing, and – if any -- alternative education that nondisabled students receive.

• the only requirements for the manifestation determination are that a knowledgeable

team conduct it based on a variety of sources of relevant information

• the manifestation determination must be accompanied by re-evaluation of the student and consideration as to whether the placement (i.e., 504 Plan) is appropriate

• w ith the exception of the six states of the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits—Alabama,

Florida, Georgia. Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas—the FAPE obligation does not continue in the wake of an expulsion for misconduct unrelated to the child’s disability.

________________________________________________________________________________

4 See, e.g., Perry Zirkel, Suspensions and Expulsions under Section 504: A Comparative Overview, 226

WEST’S EDUC. L. REP. 9 (2008).

72

Determining Specific Learning Disability Eligibility Using Response to

Instruction and Intervention (RtI2)

California Department of Education

Sacramento, 2009

73

Publishing Information

Determining Specific Learning Disability Eligibility Using Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI2) was developed by the Special

Education Division, California Department of Education. It was designed and prepared for printing by the staff of CDE Press and was published by the Department, 1430 N Street, Sacramento, CA 95814-5901. It was distributed under the provisions of the Library Distribution Act and Government Code Section 11096.

©2009 by the California Department of Education All rights reserved

Notice

The technical assistance in Determining Specific Learning Disability Eligibility Using Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI2) is not binding on local educational agencies or other entities. Except for the statutes, regulations, and court decisions that are referenced herein, compliance with it is not mandatory. (See California Education Code Section 33308.5.)

74

Contents Message from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction ................................ iv RTI2 Technical Work Group of Authors ....................................................................... v Introduction ..................................................................................................................... Foreword .......................................................................................................................... Chapter 1 Response to Instruction and Intervention ............................................... Implementation of RtI2 ............................................................................... Principles of RtI2 ........................................................................................

Chapter 2 Components of RtI2 ................................................................................... Components of Organizational Change ................................................... District Leadership ................................................................................. School Site Leadership .......................................................................... New and Expanding Roles ........................................................................ Administrators ........................................................................................ General Education Teachers ................................................................. Special Education Teachers .................................................................. Reading Specialists/Coaches ............................................................... Speech-Language Pathologists ............................................................ School Psychologists ............................................................................ School Counselors ................................................................................. Paraeducators ........................................................................................ Parents and Caregivers ......................................................................... Professional Development ........................................................................ Conclusion .................................................................................................

Chapter 3 Use of Rtl2 Data in the Specific Learning Disability Eligibility Process .......................................................................................................

Key Area #1: Low Achievement ................................................................ Key Area #2: Lack of Progress ................................................................. Progress Monitoring in RtI2 Processes ................................................ Progress Monitoring Frequency ........................................................... Comparing Student Progress ............................................................... Evaluating Individual Student Progress ............................................... Measures for Progress Monitoring ....................................................... Using Data in Decision Making ............................................................. Additional Requirements ....................................................................... Key Area #3: Role of Exclusionary Factors ............................................. Key Area #4: Appropriate Instruction ...................................................... Key Area #5: Need for Special Education ................................................

Appendix A Components to Ensure Success in RtI2: A Self-Assessment Tool ........ Appendix B Changing Roles in an RtI2 Process .......................................................... Appendix C Summary of the IDEA Regulations for Identifying Students

with SLDs ...................................................................................................

75

Message from the State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Response to Intervention (RtI) is emerging nationally as an effective strategy to support every student. The California Department of Education (CDE) is coining the term Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI²) to define a general education approach of high-quality instruction and early intervention, prevention, and behavioral strategies. RtI² offers a way to eliminate the achievement gap through a schoolwide process that provides assistance to every student, both high-achieving and struggling learners. It is a process that utilizes all resources in a school and school district in a collaborative manner to create a single, well-integrated system of instruction and interventions informed by student outcome data. RtI² is fully aligned with the research on the effectiveness of early intervention and the recommendations of the California P–16 Council. Access, culture and climate, expectations, and strategies are the council’s themes.

RtI is cited in the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004 related to the determination of a specific learning disability (SLD) and in 34 Code of Federal Regulations sections 300.307, 300.309, and 300.311. The IDEA regulations allow for the use of a process, based on a child’s response to scientific, research-based intervention, as a component to determine whether a child has an SLD. Thus, the data gained during the implementation of an effective RtI² system can be part of the process to identify students with learning disabilities. Research shows that implementation of RtI² in general education reduces the disproportionate representation of certain groups of students identified as needing special education services.

Together, we can close the achievement gap and open the door to a better future for every student, without exception. I look forward to continuing our work together.

JACK O’CONNELL State Superintendent of Public Instruction

76

RtI2 Technical Work Group of Authors

Rebekah Acord California Teachers Association (CTA) Marta Anchondo Team of Advocates for Special Kids, Inc. (TASK) - Family

Empowerment Roy Applegate Special education local plan area (SELPA) Stacy Begin Special Education Advisory Commission John Brady California Association of School Psychologists (CASP)/

Institutions of higher education (IHE) Maureen Burness Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) Cathy Christo CASP/IHE Betty Connolly CASP Ken Denman California Association of Resource Specialists and Special

Education Teachers Laura Denton State Special School, Diagnostic Center-Northern Alnita Dunn Los Angeles Unified School District Silvia DeRuvo WestEd Sherry Fritts State Special School, Diagnostic Center-Central Mary Hudler Special Education, California Department of Education (CDE) Onda Johnson Learning Support and Partnerships Division, CDE Valerie Johnson State Special School, Diagnostic Center-Southern Georgianne Knight Special Education Division, CDE Bradley J. Lenhardt Western Regional Resource Center Marc Lekowicz Learning Disability Association (LDA)—California Allan Lloyd-Jones Special Education Division, CDE Jan Mangini Special Education Advisory Commission Elen Martinez Exceptional Parents Unlimited Patrick Moran Publisher Barbara Moore-Brown California Speech-Language-Hearing Association (CSHA) John Namkung SELPA Chuck Nichols Learning Support and Partnerships Division, CDE Linda Nimer California Association of Resource Specialists and Special

Education Teachers Dave Raske California State University, Sacramento Idia Renteria Professional Development Division, CDE Virginia Reynolds WestEd Greg Roberts University of Texas, Austin Jim Russell SELPA Kate Starn Legrand Legal Office, CDE Rebecca Silva Riverside County Office of Education Alexa Slater Special Education Division, CDE Bill Tollestrup Elk Grove Unified School District Dawn Walsh Riverside County Office of Education Linda Wyatt Special Education Division, CDE

77

Introduction Philosophy

We believe that the public school system must meet the comprehensive learning needs of each student to reach high expectations. Equity of access to quality public education is the right of every student and the responsibility of the State of California.

—California Department of Education, January 18, 2008

According to State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, “Real, measurable progress has been made since the institution of standards-based education. But, while improvement in our schools has been nearly universal, our across-the-board success has still failed to close an achievement gap that threatens the future of our diverse state. Recognizing this is important. Addressing it is imperative. Too often, the struggles of the African American student, the English learner, and the learning-disabled student were hidden by overall school achievement gains. That day is past. Today we are holding ourselves accountable for the results of all children. And when we see significant groups of students falling far short of the goal of proficiency that we hold for all students we must act. Today, equipped with specific knowledge of those gaps, we must focus as never before on solutions.”1

In California, Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI2) is a systematic, data-driven approach to instruction that benefits every student. California has expanded the notion of RtI2 to communicate the full spectrum of instruction, from general core to supplemental or intensive, to meet the academic and behavioral needs of students. RtI2 integrates resources from general education, categorical programs, and special education through a comprehensive system of core instruction and interventions to benefit every student.

Of the many solution strategies that have been employed nationwide, the RtI2 model is an approach that attempts to create the conditions necessary for closing the achievement gap. RtI2 focuses on the individual student and provides a vehicle to strengthen performance for struggling students before educational problems increase in intensity and special education seems the only viable option. Leadership is critical to the implementation of RtI2. To be effective, RtI2 must harness and coordinate the full resources of the school, district, and community. Administrators and their leadership teams, in collaboration with all teachers, have central roles in the planning, implementation, and successful day-to-day use of the RtI2 approach. Analyzing how students respond to instruction and interventions is an organizing principle for structures and programs that already exist in our schools. An education system implementing RtI2

1. Jack O’Connell, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, “State of Education Address.” Address given before educational leaders, Sacramento, California, February 6, 2007.

78

promotes collaboration and shared responsibility for the learning of all students across all personnel and programs located in any given school.

RtI2 provides a vehicle to strengthen performance for struggling students before educational problems increase in intensity and special education seems the only viable option. Further, data gathered from RtI2 can be utilized in the identification process to determine if a student requires special education services.

Core Components

A cohesive RtI2 process integrates resources from general education, categorical programs, and special education into a comprehensive system of core instruction and interventions to benefit every student. The following core components are critical to the full implementation of a strong RtI2 process.

1. High-quality classroom instruction. Students receive high-quality and culturally relevant, standards-based instruction in their classroom setting by highly qualified teachers.

2. Research-based instruction. The instruction that is provided within the classroom is culturally responsive and has been demonstrated to be effective through scientific research.

3. Universal screening. School staff assesses all students to determine students’ needs. On the basis of collected data, school staff members determine which students require close progress monitoring, differentiated instruction, additional targeted assessment, a specific research-based intervention, or acceleration.

4. Continuous classroom progress monitoring. The classroom performance of all students is monitored continually within the classroom. In this way, teachers can identify those learners who need more depth and complexity in daily work and those who are not meeting benchmarks or other expected standards and adjust instruction accordingly.

5. Research-based interventions. When monitoring data indicate a student’s lack of progress, an appropriate research-based intervention is implemented. The interventions are designed to increase the intensity of the students’ instructional experience.

6. Progress monitoring during instruction and interventions. School staff members use progress monitoring data to determine the effectiveness of the acceleration or intervention and make any modifications, as needed. Carefully defined data are collected on a frequent basis to provide a cumulative record of the students’ progress, acceleration, and/or response to instruction and intervention.

7. Fidelity of program implementation. Student success in the RtI2 model requires fidelity of implementation in the delivery of content and instructional strategies specific to the learning and/or behavioral needs of the student.

8. Staff development and collaboration. All school staff members are trained in assessments, data analysis, programs, and research-based instructional practices and strategies. Site grade-level or interdisciplinary teams use a collaborative approach to analyze student data and work together in the development, implementation, and monitoring of the intervention process.

79

9. Parent involvement. The active participation of parents at all stages of the process is essential to improving the educational outcomes of their students. Parents are kept informed of the progress of their students in their native language or other mode of communication, and their input is valued in making appropriate decisions.

10. Specific learning disability determination. The RtI2 approach may be one component of the process for determining a specific learning disability as

addressed in the IDEA of 2004 statute and regulations. As part of determining eligibility, the data from the RtI2 process may be used to ensure that a student has

received research-based instruction and interventions.

80

Foreword

The low achievement and graduation rates among identified minority groups and special education students and the disproportionate representation of minority groups in special education represent serious problems that must be solved if the promise of public education is to be fulfilled. Data analysis of overrepresentation and low achievement of students who constitute our most vulnerable populations resulted in significant educational reforms found in the 2004 authorization of the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA).

The change in IDEA allows school districts to analyze how students respond to interventions as a foundational piece for assisting at-risk students in general education settings before referrals for special education are made. All students who are having difficulty keeping up with the pace of curriculum demands can enjoy the benefits of RtI2. Moreover, analyzing how students respond to instruction and interventions is an organizing principle for structures and programs that already exist in our schools. These existing programs utilize personnel in specialized ways; allocating these highly trained personnel into other areas maximizes resources effectively. The following positive outcomes have been documented in settings that have used RtI2:

• A decrease in overrepresentation of African Americans and other minority groups in special education

• A positive school climate that promotes collegiality and shared problem solving • Increased teacher retention • The unification and consolidation of resources • Improved test scores

I wish to express my thanks to the members of the California Department of Education’s RtI2 Technical Work Group. This group of educators from general and special education, community organizations, parents, and other stakeholders was convened in July 2007 and met intermittently over the course of a year. They were given the task of developing a framework for considering how RtI2 data may be used in California in the determination of a specific learning disability (SLD). This document represents the work of the group and is intended to provide technical assistance information to local educational agencies as they begin planning to implement RtI2.

Mary Hudler Director, Special Education Division

81

Chapter 1 Response to Instruction and Intervention

Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI2) is a schoolwide process of early intervention and prevention of academic and behavioral difficulties. It is a process that utilizes all resources within a school in a collaborative manner to create a single, well-integrated system of instruction and interventions informed by student outcome data. Accountability for positive outcomes for all students is a shared responsibility of all staff members.

RtI2 is a multistep process of providing high-quality, research-based instruction and interventions at varying levels of intensity for students who struggle with learning and behavior. The interventions are matched to student need, and progress is closely monitored at each level of intervention to make decisions about further instruction or interventions or both.

RtI2 is used in schools in the following three ways:

1. Prevention. All students are screened to determine their level of performance in relation to grade-level benchmarks, standards, and potential indicators of academic and behavioral difficulties. Rather than wait for students to fail, schools provide research-based instruction within general education.

2. Intervention. Based on frequent progress monitoring, interventions are provided for general education students not progressing at a rate or level of achievement commensurate with their peers. These students are then selected to receive more intense interventions.

3. Component of specific learning disability (SLD) determination. The RtI2 approach can be one component of SLD determination as addressed in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004 statute and regulations. The data from the RtI2 process may be used to demonstrate that a student has received research-based instruction and interventions as part of the eligibility determination process.

Implementation of RtI2

There are multiple ways to implement RtI2. While there is variability in a tiered system, RtI2 is generally viewed as a three-tier approach that uses research-based interventions. Instruction may be intensified based on individual student needs.

Figure 1 shows a commonly used tiered framework incorporating terminology used in program improvement efforts.

82

Tier I

Tier II

Tier III

BENCHMARK

STRATEGIC

INTENSIVE

LEVEL of NEED INTERVENTION

CORE

CORE +SUPPLEMENTAL

INTENSIVE + SBE Adopted Texts

INTENSIVE

Time Program Group Size

Figure 1

Tier I. Benchmark: Screening and Targeted Instruction

In Tier I, the focus is on a core instructional program that uses a scientifically validated curriculum with all students in the general education classroom. During the course of instruction, the school uses universal screening measures to identify each student’s level of proficiency in key academic areas. The screening data are organized to enable the review of both group and individual performance on critical measures. Instruction is differentiated in response to this data for small groups and individual students. Students who continue to lag behind their peers despite the provision of targeted instruction may receive additional Tier I instruction or may be considered for more intensive interventions at Tier II.

Tier II. Strategic: Targeted Short-term Interventions

In Tier II, supplemental instruction is provided to those students who exhibit a poor response to the targeted instruction provided through Tier I. Tier II intervention is provided in addition to, and not in lieu of, core instruction and can be delivered through an individualized problem-solving approach and/or a standard treatment protocol. (Note:

83

Schools in Program Improvement are required to follow California State Board of Education [SBE] approved intervention regulations.) (See Figure 1.)

A problem-solving approach allows school teams to design individualized interventions to address the specific needs of each student. A standard treatment protocol uses a set of research-based practices to provide interventions in a systematic manner with all participating students who have similar needs. Such interventions are generally highly structured and have a high probability of producing positive results for large numbers of students.

Tier II supplemental interventions may be discontinued for students who improve in critical academic/behavioral measures as a result of the intervention. Some students may exhibit progress but continue to need Tier II supplemental supports. Those students who fail to display meaningful progress in spite of supplemental supports are considered for more intensive interventions in Tier III.

Tier III. Intensive: Interventions with Increased Intensity

In Tier III, students receive a greater degree of intensive interventions. Modifications in frequency, duration, or teacher-student ratio or all three are strategies to increase intensity. SBE-approved intervention programs based on research may serve as the core curriculum for students in this intensive level of intervention at fourth grade and above. As in Tier II, interventions are provided flexibly depending on the school site resources and careful blending of all interventions.

Nonresponders

Students who do not respond to those targeted interventions are referred for a comprehensive evaluation to determine eligibility for special education and related services under the category of Specific Learning Disability (SLD). The student’s response to interventions, as reflected in the data collected during the RtI2 process, is reviewed as part of the eligibility determination.

Principles of RtI2

The common principles of RtI2 are as follows:

1. We can effectively teach all students. All RtI2 practices are based on the assumption and belief that all students can learn. It is then the responsibility of school staff to identify the most effective curricular, instructional, and environmental conditions that enable learning and to provide the necessary resources to enable each student to learn.

2. Use research-based, scientifically validated interventions/instruction. The requirement to use scientifically based curricula and interventions in No Child Left Behind ensures that students are exposed to curriculum and teaching that has the greatest degree of effectiveness.

3. Use assessment for three different purposes. In an RtI2 process, three types of assessments are used: (1) universal screening to determine which students need

84

closer monitoring, differentiated instruction, or a specific intervention; (2) progress monitoring to determine if interventions are producing the desired results; and (3) diagnostic tests to determine what students can and cannot achieve in important academic areas.

4. Intervene early. It is best to intervene early when problems are relatively small and before students lag further behind their peers.

5. Use a multitier approach to intervention. To achieve high rates of success for all students, instruction should be differentiated in both nature and intensity. A tiered model of intervention is an effective way to differentiate instruction.

6. Monitor student progress to inform instruction. The use of assessments that can be collected frequently and provide information regarding progress is important to determine the effectiveness of instruction and intervention.

7. Use data to make decisions. A data-based decision regarding student response to intervention is central to RtI2 practices. Decisions in RtI2 practice are based on the collective judgment of staff and parents who are directly informed by student performance data. This principle requires both ongoing data collection systems to be in place and the data to be used for making informed instructional decisions.

85

Chapter 2 Components of RtI2

RtI2 begins with a tiered approach to quality research-based instruction and interventions implemented schoolwide. A unified approach to teaching the RtI2 process requires general educators and special educators, as well as other school personnel, to provide research-based interventions and differentiated instruction to those students who are performing below expected levels of achievement. The RtI2 approach to intervention requires school staff members to collaborate as a team to analyze data and target instruction based on student need.

An RtI2 approach, with its focus on student outcomes and quality instruction, increases accountability for all learners. Systemic change at the district, site, and classroom levels that impacts instruction, intervention, and identification is necessary due to the focus of RtI2 on prevention that begins in the general education classroom. A system implementing RtI2 promotes collaboration and shared responsibility for the learning of all students across all personnel and programs located in a given school (general education, teachers of English language learners, Title 1, special educators/related services providers, administrators, and parents).

Components of Organizational Change

Changing a school involves changes at the district level and the school site level.

District Leadership

Administrative support should accompany the implementation of an RtI2 approach. This support and commitment should be articulated to the staff along with financial resources necessary to provide:

• Training • Data collection tools • Materials • Time for collaboration

Administrators should build awareness and understanding of the RtI2 process in their schools as well as ensure training that defines the RtI2 process, best practices for implementation, and the change in school culture necessary for success. Staff will understand how RtI2 relates to the mandates of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004 (IDEA).

Administrators should ensure frequent progress monitoring of student learning and behavior, which is central to a well-designed RtI2 process. Thus, it is essential to have a cost-effective and efficient data collection procedure that everyone can understand, access, and effectively use.

86

Administrators responsible for curriculum at the district level are ideally suited to work with staff members on the selection of research-based materials that need to be in place across all instructional programs. The California Department of Education (CDE) has a list of, scientific, research-based curricula adopted by the California State Board of Education (SBE) in the area of reading. Districts are mandated to use one or some of these published materials in their general education classrooms. Most, if not all, of these published reading programs have supplemental materials that may be used with students who are in need of additional support.

The district superintendent and school site administrators should provide guidance, adequate time, and support necessary to allow for ongoing collaborative teaming. This may involve a review of the caseload responsibilities for counselors, reading specialists, speech-language pathologists, psychologists, special educators, and paraeducators to accommodate their changing roles from individual instruction and evaluation to additional professional roles in collaboration, consultation, and modeling. Teams of educators and support staff (within and across grade levels) are responsible for reviewing student progress data and making recommendations for instructional practice.

School Site Leadership

The following core concepts of the RtI2 approach should be in place at the school site level in order for implementation to be successful:

• Implement scientific, research-based instruction and intervention. • Conduct ongoing monitoring of progress that increases in frequency as students

demonstrate greater educational need. • Utilize data derived from multiple sources, including curriculum-based assessment, to

inform instruction and intervention. • Conduct staff development concerning the implementation of RtI2. • Provide information to parents about the RtI2 process.

School site administrators provide leadership in all levels of the RtI2 process. They:

• Participate in and provide leadership to school site level teams within and across grade levels.

• Provide for the analysis of schoolwide and grade-level trends. • Support the RtI2 approach in the school community and with parents. • Provide support for assessment and instruction at all levels of intervention. • Ensure the fidelity of instructional delivery through monitoring.

School site leadership teams:

• Examine schoolwide trends in behavior and academics that impact student growth. • Develop a combined targeted intervention and problem-solving/decision-making

process to address individual student needs. • Support ongoing professional development. • Provide a collaborative systemic approach for the analysis and use of student data.

87

• Provide a collaborative systemic approach to using scientific, research-based interventions found to be effective with students in the school.

Classroom teachers and support personnel will be part of grade-level teams that analyze:

• Progress-monitoring data to adjust instruction • Instructional targets in the instructional planning process • Data from shared assessments • The fidelity of instructional implementation • Individual student instructional needs, such as the need for more intensive instruction

All members of the school staff come together in an instructional delivery approach that uses data-based decision making through a problem-solving process involving school professionals and parents. This process involves supports for struggling students in the general education classroom first and careful analysis and communication of the data by the school site teams (within and across grade levels). Those teams will use data to make decisions about the application of interventions, including their intensity and duration across multiple tiers of intervention. All decisions are driven by data, including decisions such as effective instructional techniques, behavioral supports, appropriate early intervention services, use of research-based strategies, movement between tiers, and when to refer a student for additional assessment.

An example of a self-assessment tool is provided to assist schools and districts in determining their current status relative to implementation of a tiered RtI2 approach. (See Appendix A, Self-Assessment Tool.) This tool addresses the critical RtI2

components of student support and may be used to determine next steps in RtI2 implementation. It is important not only to gauge the current implementation status of each item, but also to determine its relative priority.

New and Expanding Roles

School personnel will play a number of important roles in using RtI2 to provide needed instruction to struggling students as well as assist in identifying students with learning disabilities. These new and expanding roles will require some fundamental changes in the way all educators engage in assessment and intervention activities. Titles may remain the same, but some roles will change in this unified system. Emerging roles may include data managers, team leaders, data specialists, diagnosticians, and intervention specialists. (Please see Appendix B for a more detailed description of the expanded roles.)

Administrators

It is essential to recognize the importance of leadership in effectively implementing the system changes that an RtI2 process requires. Administrators will have a critical role in the planning, implementation, and successful use of the RtI2 process. School site administrators will need to determine the necessary roles and competencies, existing

88

skill levels, and professional development requirements at their sites in order to provide relevant and ongoing training activities and effectively implement RtI2.

Additionally, administrators will have to conduct a systematic assessment of the fidelity and integrity with which instruction and interventions are being provided. Working with educators, administrators will develop and utilize protocols for the assessment of fidelity and integrity of instruction and programs for individual students. Administrators will take responsibility for supporting ongoing professional development. The school site administrator assumes an active leadership role on the school site teams that review individual student progress and determine effective interventions. The administrator will ensure that adequate time is allocated for the planning, implementation, and review of the RtI2 process.

At the district level, superintendents and school boards should be supportive of the changes necessary to implement an RtI2 process. Effective RtI2 implementation will require financial and human resources that will support the professional development and staffing necessary for successful implementation.

Curriculum administrators at the district level can assist with the selection of scientific research-based instructional and intervention materials; develop district-level training for principals, educators, and support providers; and ensure the fidelity and integrity of instruction in the classroom.

General Education Teachers

Successful implementation of RtI2 depends on a unified approach to instruction that is supported by everyone in the school. (As schools and districts create and implement RtI2 processes, general education teachers will be involved in supporting the learning of all students.) A key focus of support emphasizes prevention through early intervention. RtI2 increases opportunities for teacher collaboration with other members of the educational team and brings timely and relevant supports into classrooms.

General education teachers will work in site-level teams (within and across grade levels) to identify specific student needs using data to make informed decisions that guide instruction for each student. Those teams will use data in an ongoing process for strategic student intervention groupings. Academic and/or behavioral data, collected by grade-level teams, is analyzed throughout the RtI2 process to measure a pattern of response to high-quality interventions.

Special Education Teachers

Special education teachers have unique skills that can be used to enhance the learning of all students. With an RtI2 approach, special educators will have increased opportunities to work with colleagues and students in many different settings. Special education teachers will work as members of site-level teams (within and across grade levels) to identify specific student needs by using data to make informed decisions that guide instruction for each student. Special education teachers will use their specialized

89

knowledge to individualize instruction, build skills, and recommend programs that will meet the needs of individual students.

The student’s progression through interventions may suggest the need for more individualized instruction, behavioral intervention, and/or learning supports than are available in the general education curriculum/setting. Special education teachers will be part of a comprehensive evaluation team that gathers student data in order to determine eligibility for special education. Special education teachers working with students identified as having a learning disability and needing special education services will engage in ongoing assessment of those students in order to adjust instruction accordingly.

Reading Specialists/Coaches

Reading intervention specialists/coaches offer expertise at many levels of RtI2 implementation, from systemwide program design through specific assessment and intervention efforts with the individual student. As members of the collaborative team, reading specialists/coaches will play an integral role in the implementation of the schoolwide RtI2 process. Reading specialists/coaches will be part of intervention and evaluation teams through indirect as well as direct service delivery.

Speech-Language Pathologists

Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) can play a number of roles in an RtI2 process and provide needed supports to students in both general education and special education settings. The roles will require some fundamental changes in the way that SLPs engage in assessment and intervention activities. SLPs should expand their practice to incorporate prevention and identification of at-risk students who could benefit from speech and language-based interventions as part of the RtI2 process at the school.

SLPs have expertise specifically in normal, delayed, and disordered development of speech and language skills, which are key to academic and behavioral difficulties. RtI2 is specifically intended to assist students with academic challenges in literacy as well as behavioral difficulties. The SLP’s knowledge of literacy and language-based issues can provide needed and necessary assistance to struggling learners who require intervention but may not be disabled. In an RtI2 model, SLPs will provide both direct and indirect services to the school team and to students with those types of challenges.

By working both inside and outside the special education system, SLPs can contribute to the overall school program. Some SLPs are using the RtI2 process to provide speech-only interventions to students with single-sound articulation difficulties and to provide specific interventions to students in need of such services. More specifically, the SLP’s expertise will be most beneficial to schools and students in the areas of oral language development, academic literacy, and social skills training.

SLPs are qualified to contribute in a variety of ways in prereferral interventions, systemwide program design, assessment, intervention, collaboration with colleagues, and directed support of students. They offer expertise in the language basis of literacy

90

and learning, experience with collaborative approaches to instruction/intervention, and an understanding of the use of student outcomes data when instructional decisions are made.

School Psychologists

School psychologists can offer expertise at many levels, from systemwide program design through specific assessment and intervention efforts with individual students.

School psychologists help develop, implement, and evaluate new models of service delivery.

School psychologists will support the implementation of evidence-based intervention strategies, progress-monitoring methods, problem-solving models, evaluation of instructional and program outcomes, and ecological assessment procedures, directly and indirectly. Their training in assessment is useful to the implementation of technically sound screening and progress-monitoring procedures and the appropriate use of such data. School psychologists also have knowledge regarding program evaluation and understanding of research methods, which will be useful in the development, implementation, and evaluation of evidence-based interventions. Their knowledge of child development, behavior, and principles of learning, coupled with their consultation skills, enables them to be effective members of intervention teams.

In addition to working with other school personnel to consider programmatic options, they plan and conduct comprehensive evaluations to determine eligibility for special education services and the educational needs of the students they serve.

School Counselors

School counselors bring several important skills to the RtI2 process. They have a unique central position in the school in that they are involved with the whole school experience/environment. They are aware of the totality of programs and interventions in their school and have ongoing relationships with all the teachers, students, and parents on their caseloads.

The school counselor has skills in communication/consultation that are critical to an effective RtI2 process. They can act as catalysts to facilitate the RtI2 process. School counselors’ skills in collaboration, problem solving, and consultation will be needed to maintain focus on student needs and the development of effective interventions.

The school counselor’s knowledge of child development and the field’s emphasis on working with the whole child will be invaluable in developing research-based interventions in the area of social–emotional learning.

Paraeducators

Paraeducators play an important role in the delivery of interventions to students. As one of the providers of research-based interventions, paraeducators assist general and

91

special educators in providing supplemental and specialized instruction to students. With direction and support from the schoolwide team effort, paraeducators work with students in small groups and, in some cases, one-on-one to provide research-based interventions and individualized instruction. They collaborate with other school personnel, such as general education teachers, in data collection and analysis. They perform classroom observations in order to provide relevant information regarding student performance and behavior. Paraeducators participate on school site teams that analyze academic and behavioral data and make decisions. Progress monitoring will measure patterns of response to interventions resulting in positive student outcomes.

Parents and Caregivers

Parent engagement is a key component of a strong RtI2 process. Active involvement of parents contributes greatly to improving student outcomes. Parents should be engaged in all aspects of RtI2. Schools need to inform parents in their native language and/or mode of communication of the RtI2 process and ensure that they understand how data will be gathered and used. Parents should be encouraged to actively participate in the RtI2 process and regularly informed of how their child is responding to interventions. Parents should also have an opportunity to make suggestions and receive access to written intervention plans with details about how the school is helping their student.

Professional Development

Effective implementation of an RtI2 process requires that professional development needs are examined so that administrators, teachers, support personnel, and paraeducators possess the requisite skills to implement effective RtI2. Successful implementation of RtI2 depends on the ability of all educators, including paraprofessionals and other specialists, to use RtI2 practices reliably and with fidelity. The reliability and validity with which RtI2 practices are implemented will be determined, to a great extent, by the quality of both the preservice and in-service professional development models used to translate research into effective practice. In-service professional development needs to occur both within and across administrative structures at the state, district, and site levels.

In a tiered intervention model, teachers should implement a wide variety of instructional strategies and conduct ongoing assessment of student progress as a part of their instructional practice. When an effective RtI2 program is implemented, professional development decisions should be linked to ongoing assessment and student need. Subsequent professional development should be geared toward meeting these identified needs. Teachers will be challenged to examine current practices, hone existing skills, and acquire new knowledge and skills to ensure high-quality targeted instruction. An emphasis on early intervention for preventing school failure is part of an RtI2 approach.

It is vital to offer continuing, job-embedded professional development that addresses relevant areas essential to effective implementation of RtI2 and improved student outcomes. Teachers should have opportunities to participate in focused, quality,

92

ongoing professional development relating to RtI2 processes, procedures, and practices. Based upon identified need, key training issues should include:

• The effective use of screening tools to identify those students who may be at risk of learning difficulties

• Data analysis skills related to screening and placement • Targeted instructional strategies related to data analysis • Research-based instructional practices • Differentiated instruction for a diverse classroom • Ongoing curriculum-based data collection and analysis • Evidence-based intervention strategies for both academic and behavior issues • Progress-monitoring processes and procedures • Problem-solving methods to facilitate instructional decisions based on data • Professional collaboration skills • Appropriate use of accommodations for students with disabilities • Schoolwide and individual behavior management and intervention strategies • Intensive intervention program training • Standards-based Individualized Education Program (IEP) implementation • Effective inclusion of students with disabilities in a tiered intervention model

All teachers and specialists involved in providing instruction to students should have the opportunity to participate in ongoing, job-embedded professional development that will support effective research-based instruction with the RtI2 approach. The California Legislature has created funding for teachers and instructional aides or paraprofessionals teaching math and reading or directly assisting with instruction in math or reading to receive intensive training on the use of the SBE-approved core curriculum (EC 99230 et seq.). Special education teachers and paraprofessionals who provide instructional support to students in the core curriculum should also be included in this training along with their general education colleagues. All educators should be trained in the district-adopted intervention program in order to effectively meet the needs of students in the tiered intervention model.

Conclusion

Effective RtI2 implementation is based on the belief that everyone is responsible for student learning. The instructional activities, assessment, data gathering and analysis, documentation, and collaboration required for RtI2 implementation will create new challenges for all education professionals. All educators will need to compile relevant assessment data through continuous progress monitoring and respond appropriately to the findings. School site teams will design, interpret, and assess data as well as suggest instructional approaches. By providing more intensive interventions, educators will utilize a variety of scientific, research-based methods and materials. Administrators will determine needed roles and competencies, existing skill levels, and professional development requirements in order to provide relevant and ongoing training activities in these critical areas.

93

Chapter 3

Use of RtI2 Data in the SLD Eligibility Process The results of collaboration between education professionals through the schoolwide RtI2 process can be useful in the determination of special education eligibility under the category of specific learning disability (SLD). Students identified as eligible for special education continue to be a schoolwide shared responsibility. The definition of an SLD, and the requirements for eligibility as defined in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004, can be found in Appendix C. The regulations themselves are not presented in this section. It is worthwhile to review the elements of the eligibility criteria as set out in Section 300.309 of the IDEA regulations (34 Code of Federal Regulations 300.309).

There are three subclauses in 34 CFR 300.309. The (a) clause:

(1) addresses low achievement;

(2) addresses using either (i) a response to intervention approach or (ii) a pattern of strengths and weaknesses approach to further suggest the possible presence of a specific learning disability; and

(3) addresses the exclusionary clause (that findings under (a)(1) and (a)(2) are not the primary result of a variety of other issues).

The (b) clause addresses the need to ensure that the student has had appropriate instruction (this in addition to exclusionary clause) and that progress during instruction has been documented and provided to the child’s parents.

The (c) clause states that if the requirements of (a) and (b) are met or the child is referred for an evaluation, then the public agency must promptly request parental consent to evaluate the child to see if he or she qualifies as a student with an SLD and needs special education. Therefore, if a student met the criteria in 34 CFR 300.309 (a) and (b), the need for a comprehensive evaluation to determine eligibility would be established.

An RtI2 process may yield information in the following five key areas:

• Low achievement • Lack of progress • Role of exclusionary factors • Determination that the student has received appropriate instruction • Need for special education and related services

94

In addition, a district should also include insight into individual performance through formative measures, curriculum-based measures, teacher observations, and parent reports.

This section expands on those areas and provides information as to what data might be generated through an RtI2 process that may be helpful in addressing each of those areas.

It is important to clarify that this section does not address the entire process for identifying a student as qualifying for special education services under the eligibility category of SLD. Meeting the criteria outlined in 34 CFR 300.309 requires a comprehensive evaluation and consideration of special education eligibility. The U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) remarked in comments accompanying the regulations in Section 300.304 that the public agency may not use any single procedure as the sole criterion for determining whether a child is a child with a disability.

In addition, USDOE Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) states in its presentation, “Building the Legacy: IDEA 2004”, that a comprehensive evaluation for identifying an SLD must:

• Not be replaced by an RtI2 process. • Use a variety of data-gathering tools and strategies even if RtI2 is used. • May include the results of RtI2 as one component of the information reviewed. • Not rely on a single procedure as the sole criterion for determining eligibility.

Those statements from the USDOE, OSEP, reinforce the requirement of a comprehensive evaluation to determine whether a student is eligible for special education services under the category of SLD. Guidelines regarding a comprehensive evaluation refer to all students suspected of qualifying for special education services and are contained in 34 CFR 300.304 and Section 1414 of the Act. This section of the report addresses how information from an RtI2 process can be a useful component of the comprehensive evaluation.

Parental involvement is essential throughout the RtI2 and eligibility determination process. Such involvement includes not only seeking information from parents in regard to their student’s strengths and weaknesses, but also involving parents in the intervention process.

95

Five Key Areas in the Identification Process

Key Area #1: Low Achievement

All students are expected to meet age- or grade-level standards. Lack of achievement or low achievement is often the first indicator of possible learning difficulties. Data gathered through the RtI2 process can assist in determining if these difficulties are due to the presence of an SLD. Benchmark assessment data are typically collected several times each year. Progress-monitoring data are collected more frequently. Both types can be used to inform the eligibility decision. Students with an SLD typically fail to meet specific academic targets.

Students with SLDs will not have the expected response to targeted interventions. Thus, they fail to make significant improvement when provided with appropriate intervention and will continue to demonstrate low achievement at the conclusion of intervention periods. The progress-monitoring data collected during the RtI2 process will assist in identifying the overall effectiveness of the intervention for each student. General outcome and mastery measures will show low achievement for a student with an SLD when he/she is compared with his/her peers. These measures should substantiate that the skill level of the student suspected of having an SLD does not support the student’s ability to acquire and/or demonstrate age/grade-level appropriate standards-based skills in one or more of the areas listed in 34 CFR 300.309(a)(1).

It is recommended that evidence of low achievement be obtained by examining several sources. For example, performance on the California Standards Test (CST) below the basic level could be one indicator of lack of achievement. Use of locally normed measures as well as nationally normed achievement measures may also be considered in determining low achievement.

96

Key Area #2: Lack of Progress

Progress Monitoring in RTI2 Processes

One of the most important contributions of RtI2 is providing information regarding a student’s ongoing academic progress toward specific targeted skills. With an RtI2 approach, all students’ progress is monitored regularly and some students more frequently. The data generated by progress monitoring are useful for determining whether a given instructional intervention and strategy is successful with a given population or a particular student. The data can guide decisions not only about instructional practices, but also about eligibility for special education.

Progress-Monitoring Frequency

Benchmark assessments are administered to all students on a regular basis. These data allow a school to determine if its curriculum and instruction are effective for most students and to set benchmarks of expected progress. These assessments provide a means of selecting students at risk of academic failure by identifying those who are achieving below their peers or who are not meeting predetermined benchmarks.

Students who are identified through a regular screening process and provided with an intervention are monitored more frequently than students who are progressing adequately within the general education curriculum. The rate of progress monitoring will depend on the level of intervention. General recommendations are as follows:

• For students who receive additional support at Tier I, their progress should be monitored one to two times per month.

• For students who receive more intense services such as the supplemental support services provided at Tier II, weekly progress monitoring is more appropriate.

• For students who receive Tier III services, twice a week may be an appropriate level of progress monitoring.

Monitoring of groups of students who are receiving an intervention provides information on the effectiveness of a given intervention for a particular group of students. For individual students, it provides a measure of the effectiveness of an intervention.

Comparing Student Progress

Progress-monitoring data from an RtI2 approach yield at least three sets of data: rate of growth for the average student who does not need intervention services; rate of growth for the average student receiving an intervention (whether Tier I, II, or III); and rate of growth for the student in question. Those three sets of data allow the multidisciplinary team to determine first whether the instruction (whole class or grade) or intervention (small group) is successful for the struggling student’s peers. If the rate of growth for those students who do not receive an intervention, or the small group of students who receive an intervention, is less than expected, then the team must question whether the target student’s poor growth rate is a function of a learning disability or is due to a

97

mismatch between the curricula and the needs of the students. Thus, group data, whether whole school or intervention group, provide a baseline against which an individual student’s progress can be compared.

Evaluating Individual Student Progress

A target student’s rate of growth can also be compared to other measures in addition to that of his or her peers. For example, rate of growth can be analyzed to determine if a student will reach a predetermined goal if he or she continues to achieve at the same rate of growth. There are also national norms for expected rate of growth in a variety of fluency measures commonly used for progress monitoring, such as letter naming, phonemic segmentation and passage reading. These can be used to set a target growth rate.

Measures for Progress Monitoring

There are two primary types of measures commonly used in progress monitoring: mastery and general outcome.

Mastery measures. These assessments are often embedded in the curriculum and are designed to assess how well a student has mastered a particular portion of the curriculum. These types of measures, which target a particular skill (learning short vowels, learning single-digit addition), are frequently referred to as mastery measures because they are designed to determine whether a student has sufficiently mastered a given segment of the curriculum and is ready to learn a new skill. They are also useful for teachers to determine which skills a student or group of students is lacking. Thus, a teacher is able to use the information from these assessments to differentiate instruction in order to more adequately meet the needs of his or her students. Mastery measurements may also be assessments that are not embedded in the curriculum but are designed by teachers or others in order to assess certain skills.

General outcome measures. In contrast to mastery measures that focus on one or two particular skills, general outcome measures comprise all the skills a student is expected to know by the end of the year. In essence, they are designed for repeated sampling of the same task. For example, a general outcome measure in math would include problems from the entire year’s curriculum. In reading, text passages of equal difficulty or word lists that included all the types of words to be learned would be used for assessment. Curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a form of general outcome measure that is commonly used in RtI2 approaches. In addition to focusing on the entire year’s curriculum, CBM measures also stress fluency. They are measures of short duration that can be administered quickly and easily. Perhaps the most familiar form of CBM is the use of short reading passages to assess how many words a student can read in one minute. Because these measures are not tied to a particular curriculum or intervention, they can be used across interventions to determine if a student makes more progress with one intervention versus another. In addition, they are quick and easy to administer and can be administered as often as needed. These data can be

98

displayed graphically, are easily compared to those of other students, and are easy for parents and teachers to understand.

Benchmark assessments. Benchmark assessments can be used to determine if a student is on target to meet grade-level standards.

Using the Data in Decision Making

With an RTI2 process, progress-monitoring data can help to answer the following questions:

• Is the general education curriculum effective for most students? • Which of the students are not responding sufficiently to the general education

curriculum? • Is targeted intervention effective for most students (or a particular student’s peers)? • Has a particular student made sufficient progress when provided with a range of

interventions directed toward targeted skills?

All of these questions are relevant in considering whether a student is eligible for special education services as a student with an SLD.

Additional Requirements

Parental involvement. 34 CFR 300.309(b)(2) states that there must be documentation of regular progress monitoring that is shared with parents.

Dual discrepancy. Progress-monitoring data provide two important sources of information to consider when a teacher determines whether a student needs more intensive services. First, it provides information as to the rate of growth a student is achieving in response to an intervention. Second, it provides a level of achievement to measure that student’s current status. A student may need more intensive services if he or she is both well below peers and not sufficiently responding to the current level of intervention.

Following are some useful resources and materials for learning more about progress monitoring:

• CBM and NCLB http://www.ed.gov/offices/OESE/SASA/aypstr/index.html • Training materials/probes www.interventioncentral.org • CBM Web site List • University of Oregon – Dibels

http://www.luc.edu/schools/education/c487/lap/velde.htm http://dibels.uorgon.edu and www.idea.uoregon.edu

• Florida Project http://sss.usf.edu/cbm/cbm.htm • Excellent general site www.studentprogress.org • The ABCs of CBM by Hosp, Hosp, and Howell (2007) • NASDSE publication on RtI2 • Training site for progress monitoring

www.nasdse.org

http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/onlinemodules.html • DIBELS at dibels@uoregon.edu

99

Key Area #3: Role of Exclusionary Factors

A number of exclusionary factors must also be considered when a determination of an SLD is made. Learning difficulties or lack of progress may not primarily be the result of a visual, hearing, or motor disability; mental retardation; emotional disturbance; cultural factors; environmental or economic disadvantage; or limited-English proficiency (34 CFR 300.309[a][3]). Thus, the presence of one or more of those factors may account for low or underachievement rather than a learning disability. RtI2 data are particularly useful in addressing some of these factors, including cultural factors, environmental/economic disadvantage, and limited English proficiency.

Appropriate instruction for students from diverse backgrounds must also be culturally responsive. Culturally responsive instruction is a key element for student success. Ideally, the intervention should provide data substantiating its effectiveness with culturally diverse, limited-English proficient, and/or environmentally/economically disadvantaged students. Alternatively, local data could be gathered to determine the effectiveness of intervention programs and strategies for an identified group of students.

The target student’s progress-monitoring data can be compared to that of similar students or to predetermined targets when provided with interventions that have been shown to be effective with culturally diverse, limited-English proficient, and/or environmentally/economically disadvantaged students. Data may reveal that students with SLDs fail to achieve at the same rate and/or level as their peers.

A comprehensive evaluation that includes data from other sources will also be necessary to assist in determining the presence of exclusionary factors.

100

Key Area #4: Appropriate Instruction

IDEA 2004 echoes the emphasis in No Child Left Behind (NCLB) that all students should be provided with research-based curriculum. In 34 CFR 300.309(b), the law requires the group making the eligibility determination to consider whether a student has received appropriate instruction by qualified personnel and documentation of student progress during instruction. A foundation of an RtI2 approach is the provision of research-based curricula provided by trained personnel.

In making a determination of eligibility under paragraph (4)(A), a child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the determinant factor for such determination is--(A) lack of appropriate instruction in reading, including the essential components of reading instruction (as defined in Section 1208(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965); (B) lack of instruction in math; or (C) limited English proficiency. (20 U.S.C. 1414[b][5]).

Progress-Monitoring Data

Progress-monitoring data allow a school or district to determine if a curriculum is appropriate for its population. It is expected that most students will learn when provided with the general education curriculum as verified by progress-monitoring data. Similarly, progress-monitoring data obtained during targeted intervention will reflect the effectiveness of the intervention for students with similar needs. As noted previously in “Key Area #2: Lack of Progress,” if an intervention is ineffective for most students, then the source of difficulty may be the intervention strategy or a system or implementation issue rather than learning problems inherent in the target student.

Intervention Fidelity

In addition to progress-monitoring data that will verify the effectiveness of instruction and intervention, most RtI2 approaches suggest that it is important to ensure intervention fidelity. Mechanisms need to be in place to ensure that a research-based intervention is being administered as intended. Regularly scheduled intervention fidelity monitoring can include intervention-specific checklists, self-reports, classroom observations, and observations that are components of the research-based intervention.

Documentation

Equally important is documentation that the intervention was administered for an appropriate duration (an appropriate amount of instructional minutes was provided) and that the student was present for the intervention.

101

Key Area #5: Need for Special Education

According to 34 CFR 300.101(c), each state must ensure that a free and appropriate public education (FAPE) is available to any individual child with a disability who needs special education and related services even though the child has not failed or been retained in a course or grade and is advancing from grade to grade.

Progress-monitoring data collected during the RtI2 process can assist in determining if the student requires special education services. A student may be in need of special education services if the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team determines one or more of the following:

1. Lack of progress evident across multiple interventions applied with increasing levels of intensity. This may be indicated if the student:

a. Fails to make progress or makes only minimal progress toward age- or grade-level standards

b. Fails to show progress despite appropriate intervention c. Requires highly specialized or more intensive services to make progress

2. A student requires resources or supports that are generally not available in the general education environment in order to support or sustain progress.

3. Observations of student performance in the general education environment may indicate the need for special education services. Students in need of special education services will have difficulty demonstrating the academic skills necessary for success in the general education environment. These students will need a significant level of support to participate in age- or grade-level curriculum.

102

This self-assessment tool is intended to assist schools/districts in determining their current status relative to implementation of a tiered Response to Instruction and Intervention (RtI2) approach in order to improve educational outcomes for all students. This tool addresses the critical components in an RtI2 approach of student support and may be used to determine next steps in RtI2 implementation. It is important not only to gauge the current implementation status of each item, but to also determine its relative priority.

Current level of implementation: 1= None 2= Some or beginning stages 3= Most or advanced stages 4= All or completed

Priority level 1= No 2= Medium 3= High

Comments: What does that mean for your school? What resources are required to achieve this?

General Education Curriculum

All teachers are effectively trained in the curriculum standards for the grade level and content area in which they teach. (Senate Bill 472 training)

State curriculum standards are implemented as designed in each content area.

All teachers are effectively trained in the utilization of intervention components and instructional strategies of the core curriculum.

Teachers have a thorough understanding and knowledge of the principles and strategies of differentiated instruction.

Instruction is differentiated by content, process, product, and learning environment on a consistent and ongoing basis.

Schoolwide universal screening is conducted for all students (i.e., current curriculum entry-level assessments and/or screening tools).

Grade-level teams of teachers have been established to use data to plan instruction, strategically group students for targeted instruction, and make educational decisions.

Teachers effectively utilize collaboration time to analyze curriculum-based data and adapt instruction.

103

Current level of implementation: 1= None 2= Some or beginning stages 3= Most or advanced stages 4= All or completed

Priority level 1= No 2= Medium 3= High

Comments: What does that mean for your school? What resources are required to achieve this?

A process is in place to ensure the curriculum is implemented with integrity and fidelity.

Progress Monitoring

Curriculum-based assessment/measurement (CBA/M) is used frequently to assess student progress.

Teachers are trained in the use of CBA/M to evaluate student learning.

Teachers have CBA/M tools available to them in their content area and at the appropriate grade level.

Teachers understand how to analyze, chart, and interpret data.

Teachers utilize data from ongoing CBA/M to make instructional decisions on a daily or weekly basis.

Teachers increase the frequency of progress monitoring as students receive more intensive instruction.

Research-Based Strategies All teachers are effectively trained in multiple research-based intervention strategies and demonstrate the ability to implement them in the classroom.

All teachers implement research-based intervention strategies in their classroom with integrity and fidelity.

A process is in place to ensure research-based intervention strategies are implemented with integrity and fidelity.

Standard Protocol Interventions The school has in place standard protocol interventions designed to address common and/or frequent learning or behavior problems.

104

Current level of implementation: 1= None 2= Some or beginning stages 3= Most or advanced stages 4= All or completed

Priority level 1= No 2= Medium 3= High

Comments: What does that mean for your school? What resources are required to achieve this?

Grade-level teams utilize the standard protocol to provide interventions based on student needs and on the data.

Flexible scheduling for students and staff is utilized to enable student access to standard protocols.

Job responsibilities have been restructured to enable student access to appropriate interventions.

Grade-level teams utilize a targeted intervention approach to address individual student needs.

School site uses specific criteria and data to optimize decisions about movement through the tiers.

Teachers understand criteria and site-level processes for identifying students for more intense instructional support and intervention.

Site Level Administrative Factors Site level administrators inform all stakeholders and staff, including parents, in the beginning of the school year about the role and benefits of RtI2.

The school schedule is designed to provide for flexibility and restructuring of resources to meet student needs.

Resources and training are provided to implement an effective RtI2 approach.

Various strategies including walk-throughs, extended observations, teacher conferences, lesson plan evaluations, and others, are used to monitor implementation of research-based strategies.

A variety of resources are identified and provided to address deficit areas in curriculum, behavior management, and instructional strategies.

105

Current level of implementation: 1= None 2= Some or beginning stages 3= Most or advanced stages 4= All or completed

Priority level 1= No 2= Medium 3= High

Comments: What does that mean for your school? What resources are required to achieve this?

Teachers are provided with time and incentives for collaboration, professional growth, and staff development.

Partnerships are formed with local organizations (colleges, retired teacher associations, senior groups) for programs that directly affect teacher training and student performance.

School and class data are utilized to determine areas of need for support and professional development.

Adequate and appropriate resources to address identified needs are provided to the staff.

Administrators examine professional development needs teachers, related services personnel possess the requisite skills, instructional skills, and maintain and use data to support instructional decisions. (SB 472 training)

Funding and support is available for ongoing professional development to support RtI2 to include follow-up job-embedded training for extended period of time.

Regularly scheduled meetings are available for grade-level teams to review student progress and determine area of need.

Parental Involvement Staff members utilize parent interviews, questionnaires, student records, previous teachers, and all other available resources to learn about students and the factors that may contribute to their learning and/or behavior problems.

Staff members utilize understanding of cultural differences to form relationships with parents and students and guide instruction.

Parents are notified and regularly informed of student progress, specific skills addressed, and interventions to be provided to their student using graphic representation.

106

Current level of implementation: 1= None 2= Some or beginning stages 3= Most or advanced stages 4= All or completed

Priority level 1= No 2= Medium 3= High

Comments: What does that mean for your school? What resources are required to achieve this?

School staff members serve as liaisons to parents by helping them understand the RtI2 approach and the impact on their student.

School staff members consider native language, mode of communication, and cultural sensitivity when informing families.

Source: W. N. Bender and C. Shores, Response to Intervention: A Practical Guide for Every Teacher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, 2007.

107

Appendix B Changing Roles in an RtI2 Process

Instituting RtI2 means schoolwide changes have to be made. The leadership must be ready to take new roles.

Role of Site Administrators

The school principal’s support of the district initiative to implement RtI2 is essential. At the school site level, collaboration with all staff members (general education, categorical programs, special education, and support staff) is essential. This collaboration will lead to the development of:

• Professional development activities that meet the needs of teachers, specialists and paraprofessionals (beliefs, attitudes and knowledge, and skill)

• Universal screening and frequent progress monitoring of specific skills necessary for student success

• School site teams (within and across grade levels) to address student needs • A commitment to fidelity of instruction using research-based materials • A process to allocate staff resources to meet student needs • Integrity of the tiered process • Management of and access to the data collection process

Additionally, administrators will have to conduct a systematic assessment of the fidelity and integrity with which instruction and interventions are being conducted. Working with educators, administrators should develop and utilize protocols for the assessment of fidelity and integrity of instruction and programs for individual students. Administrators should take responsibility for supporting ongoing professional development. The school site administrator assumes an active leadership role on the school site teams reviewing individual student progress and determining effective interventions. The administrator should ensure that adequate time is allocated for the planning, implementation, and review of RtI2 process.

Role of General Educators

As the primary providers of core instruction, general educators will:

• Deliver quality standards-based instruction with fidelity to all students. • Engage in ongoing collaboration to address small-group and individual student needs. • Collaborate with other school personnel in data collection and analysis. • Participate in regularly scheduled progress-monitoring meetings. • Communicate and collaborate with parents by helping them understand the new

approach and how it impacts their students. • Ensure that parent participation is integrated into each tier of intervention and

subsequent evaluation.

108

• Provide Tier I and Tier II intervention for at-risk students at their grade level, effectively utilizing core curriculum components and research-based supplemental materials based on identified student needs.

• Participate on school site teams (within and across grade levels) to analyze data and target instruction.

• Demonstrate an understanding and knowledge of the principles and strategies of differentiated instruction.

• Utilize instructional strategies to teach content that is pertinent, relevant, and meaningful.

• Compile relevant assessment data through continual progress monitoring and respond appropriately to the findings.

Role of Special Educators

As a provider of supplemental and specialized instruction that supports standards-based instruction, special educators will:

• Deliver quality standards-based instruction with fidelity to students. • Engage in ongoing collaboration to address small-group and individual student needs. • Collaborate with other school personnel in data collection and analysis. • Participate in regularly scheduled progress-monitoring meetings. • Communicate and collaborate with parents by helping them understand the new

approach and how it impacts their students. • Ensure that parent participation is integrated into each tier of intervention and

subsequent evaluation. • Provide Tier I and Tier II consultation and intervention for at-risk students, effectively

utilizing core curriculum components and research-based supplemental materials based on identified student needs if the school has a School-Based Coordination Program with an approved school site plan.

• Participate on school site teams (within and across grade levels) to analyze data and target instruction.

• Demonstrate an understanding and knowledge of the principles and strategies of differentiated instruction.

• Utilize instructional strategies to teach pertinent, relevant, and meaningful content. • Compile relevant assessment data through continual progress monitoring and

respond appropriately to the findings.

Role of Speech-Language Pathologists

In addition to providing services to students with speech and language impairments, speech-language pathologists will:

• Describe the role that language plays in curriculum, assessments, and instruction. • Define the connection between oral and written language. • Identify and analyze evidence-based research and interventions. • Assist school site teams in understanding typical language development. • Conduct training sessions on the relationship of language to learning.

109

• Collaborate with school site teams on language screening, focusing on language-related issues involved in learning, literacy, and intervention implementation.

• Interpret and explain screening and intervention results to families. • Participate in progress monitoring and analysis of student outcomes. • Identify, use, and disseminate evidence-based practices for speech and language

strategies used as RtI2 interventions at all tiers.

Role of School Psychologists

School psychologists can offer expertise at many levels, from systemwide program design through specific assessment and intervention efforts with the individual students.

School psychologists help develop, implement, and evaluate new approaches to service delivery. School psychologists will:

• Identify and analyze existing literature on problem solving and RtI2 in order to determine relevant and effective approaches for the school district.

• Work with teams to identify stakeholders and key leaders to facilitate system change. • Conduct needs assessments to identify potential obstacles, concerns, and initial

training needs. • Plan and conduct necessary staff training (on research-based instructional

interventions and how to evaluate student progress) • Develop local norms for academic achievement (curriculum-based measures and

other measures of student progress) and monitor the reliability and validity of these norms over time.

• Implement and evaluate RtI2 practices.

School psychologists will seek ways to improve skills in evidence-based intervention strategies, progress-monitoring methods, designing problem-solving models, evaluating instructional and program outcomes, and conducting ecological assessment procedures.

The expertise and support of school psychologists will be needed in the effective implementation of the tiered RtI2 interventions. School psychologists work with other school personnel to consider programmatic options, planning and conducting comprehensive evaluations to determine eligibility for special education services and the educational needs of the students they serve. School psychologists will also:

• Assist teachers with evidence-based instruction, behavioral interventions, screening of literacy skills, and criteria for evaluating academic progress.

• Participate on district curriculum committees to identify curricula and programs that adhere to research-based recommendations.

• Consult with teachers regarding the phases of instruction (planning, managing, delivering, and evaluating).

• Consult with administrators regarding the assessment system and valid data collection using tools that yield reliable and valid data.

• Assist in analyzing data and interpreting scores.

110

• Collaborate with educators to design and implement effective, research-based strategies.

• Share knowledge about various assessment systems and approaches. • Consult with educators and conduct assessments to identify the area in which small-

group academic interventions should occur and how to interpret the data. • Assist in monitoring students who do not adequately respond to interventions.

Role of Paraeducators

Paraeducators will:

• Provide researched-based interventions and assist in the provision of supplemental and specialized instruction to students.

• Deliver quality standards-based instruction with fidelity to all students. • Engage in ongoing collaboration to address small-group and individual student needs. • Work with students in small groups and in some cases, one-on-one, to provide

research-based intervention and individualized instruction. • Collaborate with other school personnel in data collection and analysis. • Perform classroom observations in order to provide relevant information regarding

student performance and behavior. • Participate in regularly scheduled progress-monitoring meetings. • Assist in analyzing academic and behavioral data and participate in the decision-

making process.

Role of Reading Specialist/Coach

Reading specialists/coaches will:

• Select, design, implement, and interpret whole-school screening programs and dynamic assessments that provide early intervention services for all students considered to be at risk and to identify “false positives,” those not truly at risk.

• Design instructional assessment models at all tier levels. • Monitor instructional effectiveness at all tier levels. • Design and implement a process for progress monitoring, data collection, and data

analysis. • Consult with parents to foster carryover and reinforcement of skills in the home. • Collaborate with general educators, school psychologists, occupational therapists,

physical therapists, and other service providers in the implementation of RtI2 approaches.

• Consult with content area teachers about their role in literacy development, such as the integration of strategies specific to phonics, morphology, vocabulary, and comprehension development into their classrooms.

• Support colleagues through mentoring and close collaboration to provide consistency in reinforcing skills.

• Engage in ongoing collaboration to address small-group and individual student needs. • Participate in regularly scheduled progress monitoring meetings.

111

• Provide consultation and intervention for at-risk students effectively utilizing core curriculum components and research-based supplemental materials based on identified student needs.

• Participate on school site teams (within and across grade levels) to analyze data and target instruction.

• Compile relevant assessment data through continual progress monitoring and respond appropriately to the findings.

Role of Parents and Families

As an RtI2 approach is implemented, procedures must guarantee that parents and families are informed and involved when students are first identified for intervention. Schools will also use a variety of ways to keep parents engaged and informed. Schools should:

• Seek parental involvement in the RtI2 implementation plans. • Invite parental participation on school site teams as a collaborative partner. • Advise the best method for parents to obtain relevant information about the school or

their child. • Distribute written material informing parents of their right to refer their student at any

time for special education evaluation, as stipulated in IDEA 2004. • Ensure that parents understand their rights and the educational rights of their student. • Provide written material that outlines the role of RtI2 data in making SLD

determinations. • Help parents understanding the data and how they are used in instructional planning

and interventions.

112

Appendix C Summary of the IDEA Regulations for Identifying

Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Prior to the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 2004, a severe discrepancy between intellectual ability and achievement in one or more of the areas of oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematics calculation, and mathematics reasoning was required in order for a student to be identified as having a specific learning disability (SLD).

IDEA 2004 and its implementing regulations provide new criteria in determining whether a student is eligible for special education and related services as a student with a specific learning disability. The following is a summary of the process of identification and evaluation from the IDEA regulations.

Definition of a Specific Learning Disability

The definition of an SLD remains unchanged from the previous versions of the law and regulations. The definition is contained in 20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1401(30) and Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 300.8(c)(10)(i)(ii) and states:

(i) Specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. (ii) 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.

Although the definition remains the same, the process used to identify and evaluate students suspected of having an SLD has changed significantly.

Significant Change to the Identification of an SLD

IDEA 2004 made a significant change regarding the discrepancy model:

(A) Notwithstanding section 1406 (b), when determining whether a child has a specific learning disability as defined in section 1401, a public educational agency shall not be required to take into consideration whether a child has a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability in oral expression, listening comprehension, written expression, basic reading skill, reading comprehension, mathematical calculation, or mathematical reasoning. (B) In determining whether a child has a specific learning disability, a local educational agency may use a process that determines if the child responds to scientific,

113

research-based intervention as a part of the evaluation procedures described in paragraphs (2) and (3). (20 U.S.C. §1414 [b][6]).

The regulations went further by allowing that states “may permit the use of other alternative research-based procedures for determining whether a student has a specific learning disability as defined in Section 300.8(c)(10)” (34 CFR 300.307[a][3]).

The eligibility criteria adopted by a state should be used by all local educational agencies in that state. The regulations do not specify the exact criteria for determining eligibility for SLDs using RtI2 and leave it up to the states to determine.

Membership of the Eligibility Group

The group that determines whether a student meets the eligibility criteria for a specific learning disability must consist of the student’s parent and a team of qualified professionals. The group also must include:

• The student’s regular education teacher; or • If the student does not have a regular education teacher, a regular education

classroom teacher qualified to teach a student of his or her age; or • For a student of less than school age, an individual qualified by the state

educational agency to teach a student of his or her age; and • At least one person qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of

students, such as a school psychologist, speech-language pathologist, or remedial reading teacher.

A local educational agency may include other individuals beyond the above-required members to assist in making the eligibility determination.

Determination of a Specific Learning Disability

The group must follow several steps to establish whether a student has an SLD.

Required Component: Determination of Lack of Achievement

First, the group must determine if the child does not achieve adequately for his or her age or meets state-approved grade-level standards in one or more of the following areas, when provided with learning experiences and instruction appropriate for the child's age or state-approved grade-level standards:

• Oral expression • Listening comprehension • Written expression • Basic reading skill • Reading fluency skills • Reading comprehension • Mathematics calculation • Mathematics problem solving

114

Second, if the group determines that a student does not achieve adequately in one or more of the eight areas listed, the group must then determine whether (1) the student does not make sufficient progress when using an RtI2 process; or (2) the student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses that is relevant to the identification of an SLD. This second step in the eligibility determination process is discussed below (34 CFR § 300.309 [a][2][i-ii]).

Required Component: Determination of Lack of Progress Using RtI2

The group may determine that a student does not make sufficient progress to meet age-or the state’s grade-level standards in one or more of the eight identified areas above when using a process based on the student’s response to scientific, research-based intervention. (Guidelines to assist the group in making the determination are found in Chapter 3.)

Required Component: Determination of a Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses

As an alternative to a determination of lack of sufficient progress using RtI2, the group may conclude that a student may have an SLD by examining whether he/she exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, compared to age- or grade-level standards, or intellectual development that is determined by the group to be relevant to the identification of an SLD using appropriate assessments.

In determining whether a pattern of strengths or weaknesses exists, the team may choose to examine profiles across or within standardized achievement tests and tests of intellectual development. These patterns of strengths or weaknesses are sometimes referred to as intra-individual differences or variability and may be relevant to the identification of an SLD.

Required Component: Determination of the Role of Exclusionary Factors

Finally, once a group has determined that (1) a student does not achieve adequately for his or her age; and (2) the student does not make sufficient progress using the RTI2

process, or the student exhibits a pattern of strengths and weaknesses in performance, achievement, or both, the team must determine that its findings regarding (1) and (2) are not primarily the result of:

• A visual, hearing, or motor disability • Mental retardation • Emotional disturbance • Cultural factors • Environmental or economic disadvantage • Limited-English proficiency

115

Required Component: Determination of Whether a Student Received Appropriate Instruction

To ensure that underachievement in a student suspected of having an SLD is not due to a lack of appropriate instruction in reading or math, the group must consider documentation that demonstrates that prior to, or as part of, the referral process, the student was provided with appropriate instruction in regular education settings delivered by qualified personnel. The group must also consider data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction, which was provided to the student’s parents.

Required Component: Observation

To document the student’s academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty, the public educational agency must ensure that the student is observed in his or her learning environment, including the regular education classroom setting. The group may fulfill this requirement by reviewing information from an observation in routine classroom instruction and monitoring of the child’s performance that was conducted before the student was referred for an evaluation, or may have at least one member of the group conduct an observation of the student’s academic performance in the regular education classroom after he or she has been referred for an evaluation and the parent’s consent has been obtained.

If the student is less than school age or out of school, a group member must observe the student in an environment appropriate to his or her age.

Required Component: Specific Documentation of the Determination of Eligibility

Upon review of all of the information gathered in the evaluation process, the group must then develop written documentation of the determination of eligibility that includes a statement of:

• Whether the student has an SLD and the basis for that determination, including an assurance that the determination has been made in accordance with 34 CFR § 300.306(c)(1)

• The relevant behaviors, if any, noted during the observation of the student and the relationship of that behavior to the student’s academic functioning

• Any educationally relevant medical findings

In an RtI2 process, the group must document:

• The instructional strategies used and the student data collected • That the student’s parents were notified about:

1. The state’s policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data that would be collected and the general education services that would be provided

116

2. Strategies for increasing the student’s rate of learning 3. Their right to request an evaluation of their child

Each group member must certify in writing whether the report reflects the member’s conclusion. If not, the member must submit a separate statement presenting his or her conclusions.

Required Component: Other Considerations

The public agency must promptly request parental consent to evaluate the student as to whether the student needs special education and related services. There are two conditions for a request: (1) whenever a student is referred for an evaluation; and (2) if, prior to a referral, the student has not made adequate progress after an appropriate period of time when provided appropriate instruction. The public educational agency must adhere to the time frames for an evaluation, unless it is extended by mutual written agreement of the student’s parents and a group of qualified professionals evaluating the student. The requirements for the determination of eligibility for SLDs are in addition to, and not in place of, all other IDEA requirements relating to evaluations and eligibility. Other considerations include the requirement to:

• Use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information.

• Refrain from use of any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining whether a student is a student with a disability.

• Use technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contributions of cognitive and behavioral factors in addition to physical and developmental factors.

117

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 300.34 ) 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 EC Section 41850, are required." EC 41850(d) defines "special education transportation" as:

118

"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 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 not 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.

119

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.

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

120

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.

121

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.

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.

122

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(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.

Taken from California Department of Education Website: http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/trnsprtgdlns.asp

123

STATE COMPLAINT PROCEDURES OVERVIEW

Anyone, including a parent, who believes there has been a violation of state or federal special education law or regulations, may file a state compliance complaint. The complaint process applies to any student who has been referred, assessed or identified for special education services. The written complaint must specify at least one alleged violation of federal and state special education laws. The violation must have occurred not more than one year prior to the date the complaint is received by the California Department of Education (CDE). When filing a complaint, parents must forward a copy of the complaint to the school district at the same time you file a state compliance complaint with the CDE. The state-level investigation and final report must be completed within 60 days of CDE receiving the complaint unless an extension is granted due to exceptional circumstances. Complaints alleging violations of federal and state special education laws or regulations may be mailed to:

California Department of Education Special Education Division

Procedural Safeguards Referral Service 1430 N Street, Suite 2401

Sacramento, CA 95814

For complaints involving issues not covered by federal or state special education laws or regulations, the district's uniform complaint procedures are followed.

Legal Basis for State Compliance Complaints • The California Department of Education shall directly intervene without waiting for local

educational agency investigation in certain situations. For complaints relating to special education, any one of the following shall be a condition for direct state intervention: The complainant alleges that a public agency, other than a local educational agency fails or refuses to comply with an applicable law or regulation relating to the provision of free appropriate public education to individuals with disabilities;

• The complainant alleges that the local educational agency or public agency fails or refuses to comply with the due process procedures established pursuant to federal and state law and regulation; or has failed or refused to implement a due process hearing order;

• The complainant alleges 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.

124

• The complainant alleges that an individual with a disability is not receiving the special education or related services specified in his or her individualized educational program (IEP).

• The complaint involves a violation of federal law governing special education or its implementing regulations.

The complaint shall identify the basis for filing the complaint directly to the Department. The Complainant must present the Department with clear and verifiable evidence that supports for the direct filing.

125

Testing Variations, Accommodations, and Modifications Note: Refer to the California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Education, for each specific assessment program for more detail.

Matrix 1. Matrix of Test Variations, Accommodations, and Modifications for Administration of California Statewide Assessments (October 2009)

STAR Program Test Variation (1)

Accommodation (2) Modification (3)

CST STS CAHSEE CELDT Physical Fitness

Test administration directions that are simplified or clarified (does not apply to test questions) ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL

Student marks in test booklet (other than responses) including highlighting

ALL For grades 2 and 3 marks must be

removed to avoid scanning interference or

transcribe.

ALL For grades 2 and 3 marks must be

removed to avoid scanning interference or

transcribe.

ALL

ALL Marked test

booklets may not be used

again.

Not Applicable

Test students in a small group setting ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Extra time on a test within a testing day ALL ALL ALL ALL ALL Test individual student separately, provided that a test examiner directly supervises the student 1 1 1 1 1

Visual magnifying equipment 1 1 1 1 Not Applicable Audio amplification equipment 1 1 1 1 1

126

STAR Program Test Variation (1)

Accommodation (2) Modification (3)

CST STS CAHSEE CELDT Physical Fitness

Noise buffers (e.g., individual carrel or study enclosure) 1 1 1 1 Not Applicable

Special lighting or acoustics; special or adaptive furniture 1 1 1 1 Not Applicable

Colored overlay, mask, or other means to maintain visual attention 1 1 1 1 Not Applicable

Manually Coded English or American Sign Language to present directions for administration (does not apply to test questions)

1 1 1 1 1

Student marks responses in test booklet and responses are transferred to a scorable answer document by an employee of the school, district, or nonpublic school

2 2 2 2 Not Applicable

Responses dictated [orally, or in Manually Coded English or American Sign Language] to a scribe for selected-response items (multiple-choice questions)

2 2 2 2 Not Applicable

Word processing software with spell and grammar check tools turned off for the essay responses (writing portion of the test)

2 Not Applicable 2 2 Not Applicable

Essay responses dictated orally or in Manually Coded English to a scribe, audio recorder, or speech-to-text converter and the student provides all spelling and language conventions

2 Not Applicable 2 2 Not Applicable

127

STAR Program Test Variation (1)

Accommodation (2) Modification (3)

CST STS CAHSEE CELDT Physical Fitness

Assistive device that does not interfere with the independent work of the student on the multiple-choice and/or essay responses (writing portion of the test)

2 2 2 2 Not Applicable

Braille transcriptions provided by the test contractor 2 2 2 2 Not Applicable Large-print versions Test items enlarged if font larger than required on large-print versions

2 2 2 2 Not Applicable

Test over more than one day for a test or test part to be administered in a single sitting 2 2 2 2 Not Applicable

Supervised breaks within a section of the test 2 2 2 2 Not Applicable Administration of the test at the most beneficial time of day to the student 2 2 2 2 2

Test administered at home or in hospital by a test examiner 2 2 2 2 2

Dictionary 3 3 3 3 Not Applicable

Manually Coded English or American Sign Language to present test questions

2 Math, Science, History–Social

Science Not Applicable

2 Math

2 Writing

Not Applicable 3

ELA 3 Reading, Listening, Speaking

3 ELA

2 Writing Task

128

STAR Program Test Variation (1)

Accommodation (2) Modification (3)

CST STS CAHSEE CELDT Physical Fitness

Test questions read aloud to student or used audio CD presentation

2 Math, Science, History–Social

Science

2 Math

2 Math

2 Writing

Not Applicable 3 Reading /

Language Arts

3 ELA 3

Reading 3 ELA

2 Writing Task

Calculator on the mathematics tests 3 3 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable

Calculator on the science tests 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Arithmetic table or formulas (not provided) on the mathematics tests 3 3 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable

Arithmetic table or formulas (not provided) on the science tests 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable

Math manipulatives on the mathematics tests 3 3 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable Math manipulatives on the science tests 3 Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Word processing software with spell and grammar check tools enabled on the essay responses writing portion of test

3 Not Applicable 3 3 Not Applicable

Essay responses dictated orally, in Manually Coded English, or in American Sign Language to a scribe [audio recorder, or speech-to-text converter] (scribe provides spelling, grammar, and language conventions)

3 Not Applicable 3 3 Not Applicable

129

STAR Program Test Variation (1)

Accommodation (2) Modification (3)

CST STS CAHSEE CELDT Physical Fitness

Assistive device that interferes with the independent work of the student on the multiple-choice and/or essay responses

3 3 3 3 Not Applicable

Unlisted Accommodation or Modification Check with CDE prior to use

Check with CDE prior to use

Check with CDE prior to use

Check with CDE prior to use

Check with CDE prior to use

130

Matrix 2. Matrix of Test Variations for Administration of California Statewide Assessments for English Learners (October 2009)

Because the CELDT and STS are tests specifically for English learners, there are not separate guidelines for administering the CELDT and the STS to this population. Please refer to the Matrix of Test Variations, Accommodations, and Modifications for Administration of California Statewide Assessments, the first table in this section, for additional variations for all students, including English learners.

STAR Program Test Variations CST CAHSEE Physical Fitness

Hear the test directions printed in the test administration manual translated into the student’s primary language. Ask clarifying questions about the test directions in the student’s primary language.

Variation Allowed Variation Allowed Variation Allowed

Additional supervised breaks within a testing day or within a test part provided that the test part is completed within the day of testing. The end of a test part is identified by a “STOP” sign.

Variation Allowed Variation Allowed Not Applicable

English learners (ELs) may have the opportunity to be tested separately with other ELs provided that the student is directly supervised by an employee of the school who has signed the test security affidavit and the student has been provided such a flexible setting as part of his/her regular instruction or assessment.

Variation Allowed Variation Allowed Variation Allowed

Access to translation glossaries/word lists (English-to-primary language). Glossaries/word lists shall not include definitions or formulas.

Variation Allowed Math, Science, History–

Social Science Variation Allowed Not Applicable Not Allowed

ELA

131

CMA Participation Criteria and Definition of Terms California Modified Assessment Participation Criteria and Definition of Terms.

California Modified Assessment Participation Criteria

These criteria for guiding individualized education program (IEP) teams in making decisions about which students with disabilities should participate in the California Modified Assessment (CMA) are based, in part, on Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 200—Title I—Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged.

1. Previous Participation

CST

The student shall have taken the California Standards Test (CST) in a previous year and scored Below Basic or Far Below Basic in the subject area being assessed by the CMA and may have taken the CST with modifications.

CAPA

Previous participation in the California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) shall not preclude a student from participation in the CMA.

The student shall have taken the CAPA Level 2–5 in two previous years and received a performance level of either Proficient or Advanced

Note: The student shall not be allowed to take both the CAPA and CMA. Students shall take either:

– CAPA in all subject areas;

– CST in all subject areas;

– CMA in all subject areas; or

– a combination of CST and CMA in the subject areas being assessed.

2. Progress Based On Multiple Measures and Objective Evidence

The student’s disability has precluded the student from achieving grade-level proficiency, as demonstrated by such objective evidence as the student’s performance on the CST and other assessments that can validly document academic achievement within the year covered by the student’s IEP plan. The determination of the student’s progress must be

132

based on multiple measurements, over a period of time that are valid for the subjects being assessed.

The student will not receive a proficient score on the CST (even with provision of accommodations) based on evidence from multiple, valid, and objective measures of student progress (or lack of progress)

3. Response To Appropriate Instruction

The student’s progress to date in response to appropriate grade- level instruction, including special education and related services designed to address the student’s individual needs, is such that, even if significant growth occurs, the IEP team is reasonably certain that the student will not achieve grade-level proficiency within the year covered by the student’s IEP plan.

The student who is assessed with the CMA has access to the curriculum, including instruction and materials for the grade in which the student is enrolled

The student’s IEP plan includes grade-level California content standards-based goals and support in the classroom for a subject or subjects assessed by the CMA.

The student has received special education and related services to support access to and progress in the general curriculum in which the student is enrolled

The IEP team has determined that the student will not achieve grade-level proficiency even with instructional intervention

4. High School Diploma

The student who takes alternate assessments based on modified academic achievement standards is not precluded from attempting to complete requirements, as defined by the State, for a regular high school diploma.

Note: Students must continue to meet the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) requirement in order to receive a diploma from a California public high school.

5. Parents Are Informed

Parents of the students selected to be assessed with the CMA are informed that their child’s achievement will be measured based on modified achievement standards.

Note: The test, while based on grade level content, is less rigorous than the CST.

133

California Modified Assessment Additional Decision Making Considerations for CMA

1. The decision to participate in the CMA is not based on the amount of time the student is receiving special education services.

2. The decision to participate in the CMA is not based on excessive or extended absences. 3. The decision to participate in the CMA is not based on language, culture, or economic

differences. 4. The decision to participate in the CMA is not based solely on the student’s disability

(i.e., deafness/blindness, visual, auditory and or motor disabilities) but rather the student’s inability to appropriately demonstrate his or her knowledge on the California content standards through the CST.

5. The decision to use the CMA is an IEP team decision based on student needs.

California Modified Assessment Definition of Terms

CAPA is designed to assess those students with significant cognitive disabilities who cannot participate in the CST or the CMA even with accommodations and/or modifications. The CDE developed CAPA to comply with the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. CAPA links directly to the California academic content standards at each grade level and accurately reflects the portions of the content standards from Kindergarten through high school that are accessible to students with significant cognitive disabilities. CAPA is given in grade spans (Levels I – V).

CMA is designed to assess those students whose disabilities preclude them from achieving grade-level proficiency on an assessment of the California content standards with or without accommodations. The CMA has been developed to provide more access so students can better demonstrate their knowledge of the California content standards. The CDE developed CMA to comply with the flexibility offered through the provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

CST in English-language arts, mathematics, science, and history-social science are administered only to students in California public schools. Except for a writing component that is administered as part of the grade four and seven English-language arts tests, all questions are multiple-choice. These tests were developed specifically to assess students' knowledge of the California content standards.

California content standards were adopted by the State Board of Education and specify what all California children are expected to know and be able to do in each grade or course.

Goals are those written by the IEP team, while not inclusive, for reading, writing, and mathematics and may include support for those areas in additional courses or study.

134

Grade-level proficiency refers to the student’s level of knowledge and degree of mastery of the California Content Standards for the subjects being assessed. This grade-level proficiency should not be confused with the STAR Performance Levels as reported on the STAR student report

Objective evidence is the most recent data available for the student’s performance on the California Standards Test (CST), CAPA, or CMA and locally used assessments and/or assignments, whether used for placement, diagnosis or to track student progress throughout the year.

Modified academic achievement standards are used to measure the student’s achievement on the California Modified Assessment; are aligned to the California content standards, but less difficult than the grade-level academic achievement standards; and are developed through a validated standard setting process.

Multiple Measures are various assessments and/or instruments, including STAR program assessments, as well as locally used assessments and/or assignments, whether used for placement, diagnosis or to track student progress throughout the year.

Valid refers to the degree to which evidence and theory support the intended purpose of the test and the interpretation of test scores for the subjects being assessed.

135

California Alternate Performance Assessment Participation Criteria

Eligibility for CAPA is based on a student’s individualized education program (IEP) that reflects an emphasis on curricular instruction of the California contents standards based on alternate achievement standards. In order to aid an IEP team in its determination of whether a student should be assessed by the CAPA, the following shall be considered:

Circle “Agree” or “Disagree” for each task:

Agree Disagree

The student demonstrates academic/cognitive ability and adaptive behavior that require substantial adjustments to the general curriculum. The student may participate in many of the same activities as his or her nondisabled peers; however, his or her learning objectives and expected outcomes focus on the functional applications of the general curriculum.

Agree Disagree The student cannot address the performance level assessed in the statewide assessment, even with accommodations or modifications.

Agree Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on the amount of time the student is receiving special education services.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on excessive or extended absences.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on language, cultural, or economic differences.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on deafness/blindness, visual, auditory, and/or motor disabilities.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not primarily

Agree

based on a specific categorical label.

Disagree The decision for alternate assessment is an IEP team decision, rather than an administrative decision.

If the answer to any of these questions is “Disagree,” the team should consider including the student in either the California Standards Tests (with the use of any necessary accommodations or modifications) or the California Modified Assessment (grades 3–5 only).

136

California Alternate Performance Assessment Participation Criteria

Eligibility for CAPA is based on a student’s individualized education program (IEP) that reflects an emphasis on curricular instruction of the California contents standards based on alternate achievement standards. In order to aid an IEP team in its determination of whether a student should be assessed by the CAPA, the following shall be considered:

Circle “Agree” or “Disagree” for each task:

Agree Disagree

The student demonstrates academic/cognitive ability and adaptive behavior that require substantial adjustments to the general curriculum. The student may participate in many of the same activities as his or her nondisabled peers; however, his or her learning objectives and expected outcomes focus on the functional applications of the general curriculum.

Agree Disagree The student cannot address the performance level assessed in the statewide assessment, even with accommodations or modifications.

Agree Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on the amount of time the student is receiving special education services.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on excessive or extended absences.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on language, cultural, or economic differences.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not

Agree

based on deafness/blindness, visual, auditory, and/or motor disabilities.

Disagree The decision to participate in the alternate assessment is not primarily

Agree

based on a specific categorical label.

Disagree The decision for alternate assessment is an IEP team decision, rather than an administrative decision.

If the answer to any of these questions is “Disagree,” the team should consider including the student in either the California Standards Tests (with the use of any necessary accommodations or modifications) or the California Modified Assessment (grades 3–5 only).

137

CAPA PARTICIPATION CRITERIA

California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) Participation Criteria assists Individualized Education Program teams in determining how a student should participate in the Standardized Testing & Reporting (STAR) Program.

Test site coordinators are responsible for having students’ Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) reviewed to determine if the students will take the California Standards Tests (CSTs) with no accommodations or modifications, take the CSTs with accommodations and/or modifications, take the California Modified Assessment (CMA), or take the CAPA. Since examiners may adapt the CAPA based on students’ instruction mode, accommodations and modifications do not apply to CAPA.

IEP teams determine how students with disabilities will participate in the STAR Program. If the IEP team determines that the student should be assessed with the CAPA, the IEP team is also responsible for determining if the student should take the grade-assigned CAPA level or CAPA Level I. This information is included on each student’s IEP. Students with grade-level designations on their IEPs must take either CAPA Level I or the CAPA level designated for their individual grade level.

Table 1. CAPA Levels.

CAPA Level Grade Range Subjects I 2–11 ELA, Math, Science II 2 & 3 ELA, Math III 4 & 5 ELA, Math, Science IV 6–8 ELA, Math, Science V 9–11 ELA, Math, Science

Students who repeat grade eleven for multiple years continue to take CAPA Level I or Level V as their statewide

138

Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP) Access

Overview of Requirements for Preschool Special Education: The following Overview of Requirements of Preschool Special Education and Timeline for DRDP Assessment System Data Collection and Reporting provide important information for assessors and administrators.

Eligible Children: All 3, 4, and 5-year-old preschoolers who have IEPs, regardless of instructional setting or services received, must be assessed using DRDP access. Children must enter preschool: before November 1st to be included in the fall assessment, and before April 1st to be included in the spring assessment.

Assessment Points: Assessors should continually observe children and document their progress on the DRDP access for children with IEPs. Based on those observations and documentation, children’s progress will be rated and reported on the DRDP access two times a year, once in the fall and once in the spring.

IEP Team Responsibilities: All children with IEPs will be administered the DRDP access effective 2009-10 school year. The IEP team is responsible for documenting the adaptations that each child uses on a daily basis and will use for this assessment.

Assessor Responsibilities: The person responsible for making sure the assessment is completed is the primary IEP service provider, which includes credentialed classroom special education teachers, speech/language pathologists, and other itinerant staff.

• The primary IEP service provider will be responsible for collecting documentation and reporting data twice a year for each child.

• When a child receives special education services and is enrolled in an early childhood program, all of the child’s service providers should collaborate in completing the assessment. DRDP results will be reported to both SED and CDD, according to the requirements of each Division.

• Special education administrators will determine the assessor in special circumstances, for example children served solely by California Children’s Services, Non-Public Schools, and Non-Public Agents.

Reporting Data: DRDP data will be reported to CDE through the Special Education Desired Results System (SEDRS) or an individual SELPA’s Management Information System (MIS).

139

TRANSPORTATION FOR STUDENTS UNDER AB 490 OR MCKINNEY VENTO

AB 490 does not require transportation for foster youth, it indicates the right to continue in school of origin if it’s in the child’s best interest, but does not mandate transportation. However, foster youth “awaiting placement” are legally homeless under McKinney Vento and are therefore eligible for transportation. It is the responsibility of the LEAs to adopt policies and procedures to ensure transportation is provided to and from the school of origin for those students who are in a shelter or temporary placement and awaiting a long-term placement. Transportation to and from the school of origin is to be provided if it is feasible and consistent with the wishes of the person holding educational rights and the student. The LEA is responsible to ensure that transportation is provided for the duration of the school year, even if the student moves from a shelter or temporary placement to a more permanent home. If two districts are involved, they must agree upon a method to apportion the cost and responsibility of transportation, or split it equally. If LEAs cannot reach an agreement, the SELPA Administrator will set up a meeting to resolve the dispute.

140

DISTRICT LETTERHEAD

{INSERT DATE} Dear {INSERT PARENT/GUARDIAN NAME} Your child with special needs will soon be enrolled in a residential nonpublic school (NPS) outside of San Mateo County. You or your child’s travels associated with your child’s initial placement, subsequent therapeutic visits by you to meet with your child and his/her therapist, or your child’s therapeutic visits home, may by reimbursable by {INSERT DISTRICT NAME}. The reimbursement of four (4) trips per fiscal year (July 1 – June 30) is provided when procedures are followed and documentation requirements are met and approval is given by the district. To assist you in meeting the requirements for reimbursement of appropriate travel expenses, the following forms are attached:

1. Travel Reimbursement Guidelines (Exhibit A) 2. Travel Reimbursement Claim Form (Exhibit B)

Please review the guidelines and make four (4) copies of the Travel Reimbursement Claim form. Complete a claim form for each trip taken and submit it together with appropriate itemized original receipts. Make a copy of the receipts and documents and keep them for your records. Submit claims to:

{INSERT DISTRCT NAME, ADDRESS AND CONTACT PERSON}

If you have any questions regarding travel reimbursement procedures or the required documentation, please call {INSERT CONTACT PERSON & PHONE NUMBER}. Sincerely, {INSERT NAME} {IINSERT TITLE}

141

{INSERT DISTRICT NAME}

TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT GUIDELINES FOR OUT OF COUNTY RESIDENTIAL

NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS

Your child with special needs will soon be enrolled in a residential nonpublic school outside of San Mateo County. Your or your child’s travel associated with the child’s initial placement, subsequent therapeutic visits by you to meet with your child and his/her therapist at the residential nonpublic school or your child’s therapeutic visits home may be reimbursable the {INSERT DISTRICT NAME}. The reimbursement of four (4) trips per fiscal year (July 1 – June 30) is provided when the procedures are followed, documentation requirements are met and approval is given by the [INSERT DISTRICT NAME}. Please use Travel Reimbursement Claim Form Exhibit B. All travel must be approved by the {INSERT DISTRICT NAME} for initial placements, family therapy/counseling, and therapeutic home visits.

GUIDELINES FOR REIMBURSEMENT

• Both PARENT and NONPUBLIC SCHOOL must notify {INSERT DISTRICT NAME} at least twenty-one (21) calendar days in advance of the trip.

• Nonpublic school must provide the {INSERT DISTRICT NAME} with written documentation of the EXACT date(s) of therapy session(s) before travel approval is granted. Note: If more than one day of family therapy is requested, sessions must be on consecutive calendar days only (two days maximum).

• {INSERT DISTRICT NAME} will contact parent and confirm that trip is approved and eligible for reimbursement.

• PARENT and/or SCHOOL is responsible for making all travel arrangements. • Parent is responsible for submitting ORIGINAL itemized receipts for ALLOWALBLE EXPENSES.

Make a copy of itemized receipts and documents you submit to the {INSERT DISTRICT NAME}. Keep copies for your files.

• Claim form (Exhibit B, attached) and documentation are to be submitted to the {IINSERT DISTRICT NAME, CONTACT PERSON AND ADDRESS}

ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURES

• Airfare: Coach class-submit passenger ticket receipts for student and/or parent(s) indicating date, passenger name, destination and cost. If a trip is postponed, reservations should be cancelled immediately.

• Automobile mileage: Allowance for transportation by private automobile to and from the residence of the student and the nonpublic school at the District approved rate.

• Hotel: Itemized original payment documentation. The District may reimburse a standard Hotel accommodation at the rate determined by US Government Service Administration for the area. Contact school for recommendations regarding suggested hotels.

• Rental Car Agreements and Fuel Receipts: Not to exceed mid-size car- itemized original payment documentation

142

• Meals: Reimbursement shall not exceed a maximum of $48.00 per day of travel (per adult, per day) – with itemized original payment documentation indicating the date, name and location of the restaurant.

• Airport Parking: Receipt, not to exceed $12.00 per day • Airport Shuttle: To and from airport – receipt not exceed $25.00 one way

NON- ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURES Including, but not limited to: • First Class/Business Class Airfare • Travel expenses for family members (i.e.; siblings, etc.) • Luxury hotels/accommodations • Luxury vehicle rentals • Student meals • Meals within San Mateo County • Entertainment related expenses • Alcoholic beverages • Snacks • Tips, etc.

143

{INSERT DISTRICT NAME}

TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT CLAIM FORM

Student Name: ______________________________________ Nonpublic School: __________________________ Name of person submitting claim: ________________________________________________________________ Address: ___________________________________________________________ Phone: ___________________ Person(s) traveling: ___________________________________________________________________________ Beginning Date of Travel: ___/___/___ Ending Date of Travel: ___/___/___ EXPENDITURE CLAIM

Transportation (Air, Car Rental, Shuttle, Taxi)

DAY 1 DATE: ___/___/___

DAY 2 DATE: ___/___/___

DAY 3 DATE: ___/___/___

Type:___________________ Type:___________________ Type:___________________ Type:___________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

STANDARD HOTEL RATE $ $ $ ADULT DAILY MEAL

ALLOWANCE Limits per adult per day: Breakfast - $10.00 Lunch - $14.00 Dinner - $24.00

B: $ ______________ L: $ ______________ D: $ ______________

B: $ ______________ L: $ ______________ D: $ ______________

B: $ ______________ L: $ ______________ D: $ ______________

RELATED EXPENSES Item: __________________ Item: __________________ Item: __________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

$ _________________ $ _________________ $ _________________

Please include original itemized documentation _________________________________ ___/___/___ Keep copies for your files Signature of Person Submitting Claim Date OFFICE USE ONLY: ___________________________________ __/___/___ Trip # 1 2 3 4 Signature of District Representative Date (Please Circle)

144

Assistive Technology Checklist http://staging.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/atexmpl.asp California Composite of Laws http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ds/ California Certified Nonpublic, Nonsectarian Schools and Agencies Database http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ds/ California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/index.asp California Services for Technical Training and Assistance http://www.calstat.org/ California State Senate http://senate.ca.gov/ CalSTAT http://www.calstat.org/transitionGuide.html CDE IEP Training Module http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/sr/ieptraining.asp CDE Special Education Division http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ Clearing House for Specialized Media and Technology http://www.cde.ca.gov/csmt/ Council for Exceptional Children http://www.cec.sped.org/ Data and Statistics in Education http://www.cde.ca.gov/ds/ Diagnostic Centers http://www.dc-cde.ca.gov/ DRDP http://www.draccess.org/

145

National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities http://www.cde.ca.gov/spbranch/sed/nichcypubs.htm National Secondary Transition Assistance Center http://www.nsttac.org/ Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) http://www.oah.dgs.ca.gov/Special+Education/Default.htm Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/osep/index.html?src=mr Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/IDEA/ Official California Legislative Information http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/ Parents Helping Parents http://www.php.com/ Positive Environments Network of Trainers (PENT) http://www.pent.ca.gov/ Regulations for IDEA 2004 http://idea.ed.gov/download/finalregulations.html Shasta County SELPA

www.shastacoe.org/selpa

Speical Education Information System (SEIS) https://www.seis.org/index.aspx

146