A COMPARISON OF IDEA AND SECTION 504 by niusheng11

VIEWS: 6 PAGES: 23

									New and Improved: IDEA
         2004

    Presenter:
    BEVERLY R. RICKHOFF
    Escamilla & Poneck, Inc.
    100 Travis Park Plaza
    711 Navarro Street
    San Antonio, Texas 78205
    (210) 225-0001
Areas Addressed


   Personnel
   ARD/IEP and Eligibility
   Discipline
   Due Process/Litigation
   Miscellaneous Provisions
ARD/IEP and Eligibility
       Issues

   LD  Students
   Teachers at ARD Meetings

   3-year IEPs

   Parental Consent for testing and
   services
LD Students and the
 Discrepancy Model

  School  districts may 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
  LD eligibility: Scientific,
Research-based Interventions

      In determining whether a
      child has a specific learning
      disability, a school district
      may use a process that
      determines if the child
      responds to scientific,
      research-based intervention
      as a part of the evaluation
      procedures
Discrepancy Model not
      Required

   School districts may still
   choose to use the
   discrepancy model (Method I
   or Method II), but may not be
   required to
   Potential for inconsistencies
   from district to district
Required ARD Committee
       Members

      At least one spec ed
      teacher/provider still required

    At least one general ed teacher still
      required if student receives
      instruction in general ed
If Parents and School Agree…


     An ARDC member’s attendance may
       be waived if parent and school
       agree that ARDC member is not
       needed because the member’s
       area of curriculum or service is not
       being modified or discussed at the
       ARD meeting
     Written Input


   If the member’s area of
    instruction/service is going to be
    discussed at the ARD, the member
    may still be excused if –
    – Member provides written input in
      advance of ARD meeting, AND
    – Parent and school district consent to
      the excusal
What about 3-year IEPs?


   Pilotprogram
   Only 15 states

   Keep your IEPs current!
Parental Consent for Testing

        Initial evaluation must still be made within
        60 days from time school gets parental
        consent for evaluation
     Exceptions:
     -student transfers from one district to
        another during the 60 days
     -parent repeatedly fails to produce the child
        for the evaluation
Parental Consent for Services


        Schools can still request a hearing
         when a parent refuses to give
         consent for an evaluation, but may
         not go to hearing when a parent
         refuses to consent to services
Due Process/Litigation

     Preliminary meeting
      – No lawyers, unless parents and school waive
        this requirement!
      – Must have within 15 days from date district
        receives notice that a DP hearing has been
        requested
      – People with decision-making authority must be
        present
      – Hearing may proceed if matter not resolved to
        parent’s satisfaction within 30 days from filing
        of complaint
    Attorneys’ Fees


   Parents still entitled to
    reimbursement if they prevail at
    hearing
   No recovery for time spent at
    preliminary meeting
   No recovery for ARD meetings
    unless convened as a result of
    hearing
More Good News on Fees

    School districts can recovery attorneys’ fees
      from parent’s attorney if school prevails
      and
            -- case was frivolous, unreasonable
      or without foundation, or
            -- parent’s attorney continued to
      litigate after the case clearly became
      frivolous, unreasonable or without
      foundation
Miscellaneous Provisions


      Pre-referral activities
      Private school students
      Assistive technology device
      Definition of “parent”
      Related services
Pre-referral Activities


    Up to 15% of Part B funds may be
     used for regular ed students
    Funds are for students who need
     “additional academic and
     behavioral support” to be
     successful in reg ed
Pre-referral Activities (Cont’d)


         Allows professional development to
          enable delivery of
          – Scientifically-based academic
            instruction and behavioral
            interventions
          – Scientifically-based literacy instruction
          – Instruction on use of adaptive and
            instructional software
Pre-referral Activities (Cont’d)


         Such activities do not create a right
          to all of IDEA protections for regular
          ed students
         Funds are to carry out coordinated,
          early intervening services (are to
          supplement, not supplant, Title I
          funds)
Private School Students


     Child find requirements extended to
      students who attend private
      schools in your district, not just
      those who reside in your district
Assistive Technology


    Definition was changed to state that
     AT “does not include a medical
     device that is surgically implanted,
     or the replacement of such device”
    In other words, schools not
     responsible for servicing cochlear
     implants
Definition of “Parent”


    Now includes foster parents
    Children of foster parents are not
     considered wards of the state, so
     they do not require a surrogate
     parent
    Texas law may need to be modified
     to reflect the new IDEA definition
Related Services


   Interpreting services and school
    nursing services identified in
    student’s IEP are added to list of
    related services
   Remember that this list is not
    exhaustive, so other appropriate
    related services may still apply

								
To top