Tse Ii Ahi Community School (TCS) EXIT MEETING NOTES (Special Education Notes)11/18/2015

Tse’ii’ahi’ Community School (TCS) -- EXIT MEETING NOTES (Special Education Notes)11/18/2015

STRENGTHS

• Per NASIS records, teacher report and observations, the majority of students with IEPs are serviced in with their nondisabled peers 80% or more of the school day.

• Documentation of parent communication and invitation to IEP program planning meetings were evident in your file reviews and in review of staff communication and data logs.

• Each file reviewed contained a record of access, per federal regulations.

• School observations and staff interviews demonstrate clearly that SWDs are general education students first. There is a very inclusive “we are as one” school climate.

NEEDS / RECOMMENDATIONS

• There is limited evidence of a schoolwide behavior plan; however, IEPs reviewed indicated that students would follow the school-wide plan. For students with disabilities that may manifest behaviorally, this may prove to be problematic.

• Review indicates a need for assistive technology to support students with disabilities in the general education classroom, resource and related services.

• Per IEP reviews and teacher input, the process for making educational environment decisions, service minutes allocations and IEP goal determinations are not well documented or clearly defined.

• IEP reviews demonstrate limited individualized consideration of the needs of student in the following areas 1.) Assistive Technology 2.) Behavior Supports and 3.) Supports to School Personnel

• TCS utilizes the BIE special education referral packet to assist school staff in referring a student for special education evaluation. This packet has been made available to all general education teachers; however, there is a rule of thumb at TCS that that teachers are required to demonstrate three trials or intervention periods before the referral to special education is accepted. While this “rule of thumb” appears to be rooted in RtI best practices; however, itshould not be a formal rule for referrals for all suspected disabilities. Flexibility is required to ensure that decisions to proceed with special education eligibility evaluations are based on a case-to-case basis to ensure that TCS is in compliance with regulatory statutes and that studentsare not adversely impacted during a mandatory “three trials RtI period”.

• In the recent past, SWDs have not consistently received the related services minutes as designated in their IEPs. Evidence of the documentation, parent notification and remediation for these missed services were not clearly identified.

• Per IEP reviews, observations and teacher input, supports for school personnel are not considered during IEP development and are not implemented within the school setting per IDEA statues.

• Based on teacher and service provider reports, limitations in the process for documenting flexible or nontraditional special education services (varying location of services, types of service and/or service minutes) within the NASIS IEP program have hindered, and may continue to hinder,TCS’s IEP teams’ exploration and documentation of more pliant service options for SWDs.

• Based on staff input and observation, there have been efforts to address child find mandates within the community, especially for early childhood services; however, a streamlined and universal process is not clearly identifiable within the school.

• Based on teacher report, general education teachers are not provided with the necessary opportunities to participate in the IEP planning process and quarterly progress reporting.

• Based on teacher reports, general education teachers have not been provided with the requisite consultation, planning and/or collaboration time with special education staff members necessary to ensure that they are able to implement students’ IEPs effectively in the general education settings.

• Based on staff report, IEP reviews and observations, TCS is in need of basic assistive technology, improved infrastructure and facilities (i.e., a gym, designated appropriate and accessible locations for related service provisions) and specialized instructional resources that are necessary to support SWDs’ observed and IEP documented needs, services and interventions.

/

• Consider developing and utilizing a schoolwide behavior plan rooted in positive behavioral interventions strategies.

• Ensure that IEPs are updated annually with new and relevant IEP goals that are age appropriate, individualized and standards based.

• Ensure that PLAAFPS include the full scope of IDEA required information; especially students’ functional and academic levels of performance, as well as student strengths.

• Ensure that IEPs are developed by a comprehensive team, are individualized and that decisions regarding where educational services will be provided are based on the student’s needs and in the least restrictive environment possible to meet those needs.

• Ensure that general education teachers are aware of their role in IEP development, provision of services and monitoring of student progress. Provide any requisite training related to IDEA special education regulations and IEPs/IEP related documents to ensure that general education teachers to remediate any deficits of understanding that impact IEP program development/planning, pre-referral interventions and IEP service provision.

• Ensure that the need for “supports to school personnel” areconsideredduring each and every IEP annual review and modification meeting. These supports should also be documented within the IEP should the planning team determine that they are necessary in order for the student to have equal access to the general education curriculum, receive their services in the LRE and to utilize the technology, accommodations, adaptions, related services and any other interventions, supports or services that are outlined in the student’s IEP.

• Provide opportunities for general education and special education staff to meet to share timely lesson/unit planning information, discuss and provide strategies for the SWDs and students in the referral process, as well as to obtain updated SWD progress for SWDs and general consultation.

• Provide ongoing supervision and training to all education technicians (1:1 spec. ed. supportive staff and ‘specials class’ facilitators) on how to accommodate and support SWDs in the general education setting. Also, ensure that there is a standard and consistent method of communicating accommodations and pertinent IEP goals to these staff members with each annual review.

• Special education support personnel (i.e., 1:1 dedicated special education technician) should work under the direct supervision of the special education teacher. As such, the school’s special education teacher and school administrator should ensure that special education support staff are well prepared to implement students’ IEPs effectively within the various school and community settings. Consider periodically observing the staff member at work to assess and remediate any areas of need, providing the staff member with training opportunities throughout the school year, and ensuring that the staff member has regularly scheduled consultation time with the special education teacher.

• Ensure that students are receiving all of their related service minutes according to their IEPS. Consider developing a plan for tracking this. Establish a timeline for making up missed sessions and/or notifying parents of missing related service minutes and plan recuperative services expeditiously.