IDEA Inappropriate Identification Regulatory Sections (OSEP)

IDEA Inappropriate Identification Regulatory Sections (OSEP)

LEAs having disproportionate representation that was the result of inappropriate identification must be in compliance with the requirements in 34 CFR §§300.111, 300.201 and 300.301 through 300.311.

These 13 regulatory provisions refer to the following, which are included at Appendix H:

·  Child find (§300.111)

·  LEA policies, procedures and practices consistent with SEA’s (§300.201)

·  Initial evaluations (§ 300.301)

·  Screening (§300.302)

·  Reevaluations (§300.303)

·  Evaluation procedures (§300.304)

·  Additional requirements for (re)evaluations (§300.305)

·  Determination of eligibility (§300.306)

·  Specific learning disabilities (§300.307)

·  Additional group members (§300.308)

·  Determining the existence of a specific learning disability (§300.309)

·  Observation (§300.310)

·  Specific documentation for the eligibility determination (§300.311)

Policy & Procedure Questions

Ö  Leadership and collaboration

·  What administrative unit will lead the RTI/PBIS initiative, e.g., general education with special education support?

·  What will be the organizational structure for developing the framework and establishing policies, procedures and practices? What stakeholders will be involved? Will the team be cross-functional and include individuals involved with teaching students who are ELL, students with IEPs, charter schools, etc?

Ö  Core instruction

·  Is research-based core instruction in place at every school and for every student? To what extent does this apply to preschoolers? Does core instruction include a universal design for learning to support differentiated instruction and low intensity interventions for students needing additional support or assistance? Do teachers use data to determine the proper teaching and learning tools to meet the needs of each student?

·  Does the LEA have data to answer these questions? If additional steps need to be taken to answer the questions, what are they and what is the plan for implementation? How does the LEA determine if core instruction is implemented with fidelity, i.e., are interventions required because core instruction is not provided in the expected manner?

·  To what extent should the following be required or encouraged: peer supports in the classroom; instructional groupings that promote heterogeneous groups of students working together; flexible groupings of students for different purposes; reading buddies; cooperative learning groups; cross age peer tutoring, etc.?[1] To what extent should the following be required or encouraged: incorporation of culturally responsive materials and content in the curricula and use of culturally responsive teaching practices? In this respect, do classroom materials include stories and perspectives from diverse cultures; is instruction varied (e.g., small group, cooperative learning high teacher-student interaction; is there high energy and animation in the classroom; are there real world relevant learning activities; is there a high level of teacher-student interactions, etc.?[2]

Ö  PBIS universal tier

·  Are preventive and proactive universal positive behavior supports in place at every school and every grade?

·  Does the LEA have data to answer this question? If additional steps need to be taken to answer the questions, what are they and what is the plan for implementation?

·  What human resources are available to support implementation?

Ö  Universal screening

·  To what extent are schools engaging in universal screening?

·  Will the LEA engage in systemic universal screening? In what areas, e.g., reading (five areas), math, behavior?

·  If so, will it be required or not? If required, for what schools, grades, and students, including preschool? What is the gap between current and desired practice?

·  What tools will be utilized for the various areas and students, i.e., ELLs, students with disabilities?

·  What human resources will be available to support universal screening and how will the activity be organized?

·  What criteria will be applied to results of universal screening to determine (if any) the type and intensity of assistance students require, including enrichment? (These criteria will impact decisions regarding increasingly intensive general education interventions addressed in the next section.)

·  How many students would be eligible for various levels of general education interventions under the above criteria, by school, grade and area? Is this number manageable?

·  How will data be maintained, i.e., paper or electronically? How will data be analyzed; what type of reports will be available (e.g., by area, school, grade, teacher type of student, etc.)?

·  Who will have access to such reports, ensuring confidentiality is maintained e.g., public and other stakeholders?

Ö  Increasingly intensive general education interventions

·  For each level or tier of interventions and subject area, what criteria will be used for the following: number of minutes for interventions during a period; number of days during the week; maximum number of students in each group?

·  Does the framework include preschool, with a focus on early literacy, language and social/ emotional skills?

·  What processes will the LEA use to plan interventions, e.g., to what extent will staff members rely on a protocol and/or problem solving teams?

·  If problem-solving or student support/assistance teams are involved, what participants if any are required, will there be standards for their implementation, how frequently should they meet to review student progress, are parents involved, etc.?

·  What scientific research-based interventions will be available in each area, grade and school?

·  What behavioral support will be available at each intervention level?

·  What length of time is reasonable for an intervention for various levels/areas to be implemented?

·  What is the gap between current and needed human and material resources?

·  What support will be provided to students if the number needing support exceeds availability of human or material resources?

·  What data, if any, will be collected regarding fidelity of intervention, i.e., how will staff know if students are not making progress because interventions are ineffective or because they were not implemented with sufficient fidelity?

·  Will there be an expectation for flexible grouping that allows for inter- and intra-class groups that includes students with and without disabilities and students who are ELLs with a need for similar interventions?

(Note: students with IEPs also should receive interventions, depending on universal screening results.)

Ö  Progress monitoring

·  What are the expectations for progress monitoring, i.e., frequency based on level of intervention, frequency of progress review, parent involvement?

·  To what extent is progress monitoring currently being implemented? Is there data available to answer this question? What is the gap between current and expected use?

·  What standards will apply to decisions regarding a student’s need for more intensive interventions? How much progress is sufficient? At what point should staff members consider a student’s need for Section 504 or special education services? Will the LEA establish a time frame by which students should be referred for an evaluation once a decision is made?

·  How will progress monitoring be documented, e.g., by paper, electronic system, using charts or graphs, etc.?

·  What human resources are available to monitor progress and how will they be organized?

·  How will the results be analyzed?

·  How will the data be analyzed; what type of reports will be available (e.g., by area, school, grade, teacher type of student, etc.)?

·  Who will have access to such reports, ensuring confidentiality, e.g., public and other stakeholders?

(Note: progress monitoring applies to students with IEPs and the interventions they receive.)

Ö  Professional development & technical assistance

·  Based on the above, what professional development is needed in each area to implement them successfully? Scheduling services? How will the training be differentiated based on participants’ knowledge?

·  What groups of staff persons will require training, e.g., general educators, special educators, ELL teachers, paraprofessionals, related service personnel, and education administrators?

·  How will professional development be provided to ensure maximum saturation on an initial and ongoing basis for current and new staff? Will coaching and/or mentoring by knowledgeable individuals be available?

·  What do administrative and other staff persons need to know to determine if implementation expectations are being met?

·  Will a certification process be used to confirm participants learned material as expected?

·  Will exemplary schools be identified to showcase their efforts and provide training, mentoring, coaching to others?

Ö  Parent involvement

·  How will parents be informed about the process and their child’s progress?

·  How will parents be involved in the process and encouraged to do so?

·  What steps will be taken to ensure that written and oral communications are culturally and linguistically appropriate? Will a parent focus group review written information and provide feedback?

Ö  Accountability

·  Will the policies, procedures and practices developed be monitored?

·  If so, who will monitor and how, e.g., cross-functional teams?

·  Will there be incentives and consequences for implementation?

·  If so, what and how will they be communicated?

·  Will exemplary schools be identified and, if so, how will they be encouraged to share their knowledge with other schools?

Ö  Funding sources (See Chapter 3 for more information on this topic.)

·  What are the various types of schools that will implement RTI/PBIS, i.e., Title I and/or non-Title I?

·  Do the Title I schools operate schoolwide or targeted assistance programs? Will targeted assistance schools implement “push-in” services to support more flexible funding?

·  Is the LEA required to use 15 percent of its IDEA funds for EIS activities? If not, will up to 15 percent of the funds be used voluntarily? If so, what type of the above schools will be involved?

·  If the SEA determined that the LEA met its IDEA requirements, will the LEA reduce its MOE and utilize state and local funds for any of these activities?

·  Based on these answers, will multiple Federal funds be available and, if so, how will they be used?

·  Are there other funding sources available to support necessary activities?

PROBES

The following probes are illustrative of those that may be used to identify inappropriate identification. This is a critical step as they drive the framework for the review.

Core instruction and increasingly intensive interventions

No. / Policies, Procedures & Practices / Implementation (Focus Groups/File Review)
1 / Describes use of research-based core instruction / Students have access to research-based core instruction based on grade-level standards
2 / Requires and describes use of differentiated instruction to facilitate access to core instruction / Differentiated instruction is used to facilitate access to core instruction.
3 / Describes research-based universal screening tools with criteria for levels of reading intervention for various grade levels / Evidence of universal screening in use.
4 / Describe research-based increasingly intensive interventions / Research-based increasingly intensive interventions are implemented.
5 / Reading interventions for: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension / Reading interventions used for: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension.
6 / Positive behavior interventions are identified / Positive behavior interventions are used.
7 / Speech/language interventions identified / Speech/language interventions are used.
8 / Cultural & linguistically appropriate
9 / Describes process for determining type of interventions for students based areas of need / Implements process for identifying appropriate interventions based on students’ areas of need.
10 / Describes fidelity measures for interventions:
Maximum group size / Fidelity measures for interventions are used:
Maximum group size
11 / Minimum session length / Minimum session length
12 / Minimum number sessions per week and / Minimum number sessions per week and
13 / Maximum amount of time permitted for intervention to show student progress / Maximum amount of time permitted for intervention to show student progress.
14 / Describes process to determine if appropriate interventions are implemented with fidelity / Fidelity indicators are implemented.

Progress Monitoring

No. / Policies, Procedures & Practices / Implementation (Focus Groups/File Review)
15 / Selected appropriate progress monitoring tools for:
Reading areas (and grade levels) / Selected progress monitoring tools used for:
Reading areas (and grade levels)
16 / Behavior / Behavior
Set fidelity measures for: / Fidelity measures are implemented for:
17 / Reasonable monitoring frequency / Reasonable monitoring frequency
18 / Review of progress / Review of progress
19 / Modifying intervention(s) based on data / Modifying intervention(s) based on data
20 / Set reasonable expectations for documentation of student progress, e.g., charts, tables, etc. / Student progress is documented through charts, tables, etc.
21 / Set reasonable standards for parental involvement in reviewing student progress and sharing results. / Standards for parental involvement in reviewing student progress and sharing results are met.
22 / Described staff involved in reviewing data. / Appropriate staff persons review data.

Referral for Special Education Evaluation

No. / Policies, Procedures & Practices / Implementation (Focus Groups/File Review)
23 / Set process for collection/analysis of referral data by race/ethnicity, school and grade to identify and address trends contributing to disproportionality / Data is analyzed by race/ethnicity by school and grade and patterns contributing to disproportionality are investigated and reviewed.
24 / Set appropriate criteria to initiate evaluation. / Appropriate criteria used to initiate evaluation.
25 / Require principals to review referrals per criteria. / Principals review referrals for appropriateness.
26 / Set process for reviewing student progress to ensure that evaluations are initiated when appropriate. / Student progress is reviewed regularly to ensure that evaluations are initiated when appropriate.
27 / Referral process requires documentation of:
Core instruction aligned with standards / Referral process documents:
Core instruction aligned with standards
28 / Differentiated instruction / Differentiated instruction
29 / Appropriate interventions, including behavior / Appropriate interventions, including behavior
30 / Progress monitoring documentation / Progress monitoring documentation
31 / Review of progress to drive interventions / Review of progress to drive interventions
32 / Sufficient time for interventions to benefit / Sufficient time for interventions to benefit

Assessment

No. / Policies, Procedures & Practices / Implementation (Focus Groups/File Review)
33 / Set appropriate standards for evaluation process. / Standards for conduct of evaluations are followed.
34 / Describe how evaluation will consider student’s race/ethnicity, cultural and linguistic background. / Evaluations consider student’s race/ethnicity, cultural and linguistic background per expectations.
35 / Set standards for observation of instruction, including differentiation, and interventions / Instruction (including differentiation) and interventions are observed per standards.
36 / Set appropriate parental involvement in process. / Support parent involvement per standards.
37 / Protocol in place to monitor evaluations for completeness and consideration of each student’s cultural and linguistic background. / Evaluations are monitored for completeness and consideration of cultural and linguistic background and follow-up steps are taken as appropriate.

Eligibility