Special Education Update February 15_ 2012 by pptfiles



         February 15, 2012
  ESC-20/AACASE Special Education
          Director Meeting
           Model IEP Form
 There will not be any changes to monitoring
  based on the use/non-use of the model form
 Companion Documents are Pending
 Use of the model form is optional
 The model form only deals with content of IEP,
  and a few state statutes.
 Requirements for additional documentation
  did not change because of the development of
  this form.
                FIEP Process
 FIEP Survey Links:


 All ARDC members complete survey if the ARD
  Meeting was considered an FIEP Meeting by local
 Ultimate Goal: Build capacity with ARDC
  members to develop the most effective IEPs for
  students with disabilities
          SPP Compliance
 Stronger focus on LEAs with continued non-
  compliance with SPP 11, 12 & 13
 Monitors will be working more closely with
  LEAs if % is decreasing
 Goal is always 100% Compliance
 Not expected dramatic changes to SPP
               Funding Updates
Maximum Entitlements
 Reinstatement of Funds:
     The federal government decreased funds to states in the fall of 2011.
      TEA chose to make up the decrease for districts. Another 1.5%
      decrease was anticipated for spring 2012. Congress is now
      reinstating the funds based on the fall 2011. Since TEA already
      made that up, districts will feel very little effect. The decrease will
      be slight (about .08%).
  Maximum Entitlements will be delayed due to this

High Cost Funds
  The TEA reorganization has slowed this process
  Letter of NOGA anticipated mid to late February
  Funds will be retroactive back to October
      Maintenance of Effort
 Letter of Potential Non-Compliance mailed
  January 19, 2012
 Comparison of 2008-2009 & 2009-2010
 Response deadline is February 21, 2012
 20 LEAs received letters in ESC-20 and all have
  been notified
 MOE Letters comparing 2009-2010 & 2010-2011
  expected to be mailed in May 2012
Where does the $ come from?
 Fund Code
   Districts-199 or 437 (SSA)
   Only For FY 2010 & 2011 fund 266 or 366 (SSA) will
    be used (SFSF Funds)
 Program Intent Codes
   PIC 23 (Special Education) vs.
    PIC 99 (Misc./Undistributed)
 Function Codes
   11, 12, 13, 21, 23, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 41, 51, 53
                   MOE Exceptions
1) TEA Form C: The voluntary departure, by resignation or retirement, or
departure for just cause, of special education or related services personnel who
were funded with state and/or local funds. Reductions in force do not qualify as
an exception;
2) TEA Form D: A decrease in the enrollment of children with disabilities. (This
exception is difficult to qualify for because the LEA must still spend the same
amount per pupil; this will not be accepted as an exception if the LEA received an
increase in their State special education block grant in 2009-2010.);
3) TEA Form E: The termination of a program within special education to a
particular child with a disability that is an exceptionally costly program, because
the child:
a. Has left the jurisdiction of the agency;
b. Has reached the age at which the obligation of the agency to provide FAPE has
terminated; or
c. No longer needs the program of special education;
4) TEA Form F: The termination of costly expenditures for long-term purchases
(must be Capital Outlay Purchases); and/or
5) TEA Form G: The assumption of cost by the high cost fund (Fund 266/315)
under 34 CFR §300.704(c).
 Other Considerations for MOE
 Use of State Fiscal Stabilization Funds (SFSF, Fund
  266/366) for special education and coded the
  expenditures to PIC 23
    Ensure that these amounts were included in the Summary
     of Compliance worksheet attached to the Preliminary
     Letter of Findings from TEA.

 Erroneous PEIMS data
    Use TEA’s Form H on the TEA website.

 Voluntary reduction of MOE in 2009-2010 due to
  an increase in your IDEA-B Formula entitlement
    Use TEA’s Form B.
                    SHARS Update
School Health and Related Services (SHARS)
  This program was recently assigned to the Division of Federal and
    State Education Policy.
  TEA wants to put in place an infrastructure to handle this
    program and the training for it (possibly via TETNs or Project
  The organization and process for this is currently under
    consideration by TEA.
  Overview Handout provided: School Health and Related Services
    (SHARS) PowerPoint
       Steps to becoming a provider
       Audit Review Documentation
       Documentation Reminders
       Common Findings
       Related Information
       Contact Information
  Handout provided: Five Steps to Becoming a School Health and
   Related Services (SHARS) Medicaid Provider
          HB 1335 Guidance
 Handout provided: H.B. No.1335
 New Requirement:
   (11) ensure that each district develops a process, to be used
    by a teacher who instructs a student with a disability in a
    regular classroom setting in requesting a review of the
    student’s IEP, that provides for:
    (A) A timely district response to the teacher’s request; and
    (B) Notification to the student’s parent or legal guardian of
        that response
 Update Operating Guidelines and Share
  Updated Information
 Civil Rights Data Collection
 Letters have been sent out
 Not a Sped Data Collection—ALL STUDENTS
 Data Collected:
   Part 1: Point in Time/Snapshot Data
   Part 2: End of year/Cumulative Data
   School Level & District Level
 Handouts Provided
       Larry Rodriguez

To top