# data[].attributes.body
Jireh Pascual
SPD631 Special Ed Law
Instructor Maria Carr
June 11, 2022

# data[].attributes.body
There are a few tips for improving parent-teacher relationships. One important part having an open line of communication. For instance, parents share what methods or strategies work with children with behaviors or anxiety. When strategies are used consistently at home and school, this could leave a positive impact for the child.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Transcript:

The key to improving your child's experience in school? Parent-teacher relationships

John-Pierre LaFleur, M.Ed. School Counselor, East BR Parish School System

Greetings. My name is John-Pierre LaFleur, and I currently work as a school counselor in the schools in the great state of Louisiana.
Today, I have a 1 Quick Question that states:

As a parent, what can I do to improve the interactions between my child, who has a disability, and school stakeholders?

Just as a little context, when I say school stakeholders, I'm referring to teachers, I'm referring to IEP teachers, I'm referring to 504 coordinators. Anyone who is associated at the school. And what I think is really important is for the parents and those school stakeholders to have an open line of communication.

I also think it is vital that the parent shares with the school what strategies that they are working on at home. Number one, this can help influence consistency with the child because what's being used to help cope and relax and relieve anxiety is being practiced at home as well as at school. I also think this would positively impact the relationship between those stakeholders at the school and the child with the disability.

Thank you so much for listening to this one quick video, and I am looking forward to us diving into this topic a little bit further in our webinar.

Thank you!

For more resources, please visit: www.exceptionallives.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The key to improving your child's experience in school? Parent-teacher relationships - Exceptional Lives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Transcript: Greetings. My name is John-Pierre LaFleur, and I currently work as a school counselor in the schools in the great state of Louisiana. Today, I have a 1 Quick Question that states: Just as a little context, when I say school stakeholders, I'm referring to teachers, I'm referring to IEP teachers, I'm referring to 504 coordinators.

# data[].attributes.body
Parents may wonder why occupational therapy is needed for a child with special needs. According to this video, "a child's job is to play". If your kid is having trouble picking up little bits of food with their fingers, holding onto a spoon or fork, pulling on their clothes, such as their shirt, pants, or socks, utilizing zippers, or even tying their shoes, an occupational therapist may be able to assist them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Read Transcript

Well, a child's job is to play. So if they're having trouble reaching for toys, or even holding onto toys, stacking blocks, or pressing buttons on musical toys, then they might need help from an occupational therapist. A child's job is to become more independent, and that includes feeding themselves and dressing themselves. So if your child is having problems picking up small bits of food with their fingers, holding onto a spoon or fork, pulling on their clothes, like their shirt, or their pants, or their socks, using zippers, or even tying their shoes, they may need the help of an occupational therapist. A child's job is to go to school and learn, and so if they're having problems holding their pencil, writing clearly, or even copying things from the board, then they might need the help of an occupational therapist. If your child is having problems, or you have any concerns about any of these items, please contact an occupational therapist, and they can do an evaluation and help you out. Thank you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
I thought OT was about workplace skills. Why does my child need OT if they don't work? - Exceptional Lives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If your young child has a disability or delay, you may have been referred to Occupational Therapy. But what does occupational therapy mean for a child? Anne and Kim from the McMains Child Development Center explain how OT can help a child with their most important work - play.

# data[].attributes.body
If your child has special needs, the school district is required to draft an IEP for him or her that includes a FAPE offer. This offer is a legally binding contract between the school district and the parent for services. This implies that a school is in breach of the law if it fails to provide the services that were agreed upon in the IEP. When a school breaks the law, the consequences may include paying for the student's legal fees, as well as the school system providing services to make up for the loss of services.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's tough as a parent of a child with a disability. When your child starts school, you hope that the teachers and school staff have your child's best interests in mind. But how do you know if your child with special needs is getting the educational services he or she deserves?

Children with special needs have rights that allow them to receive distinct services through the public school system. The most important thing to remember when advocating for your child is that students with disabilities must have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) that have offers of Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), and that they are entitled to acquire their education within the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). Under federal law, these rights are guaranteed, including the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990).
The IEP & FAPE
When your child has a disability, the school district must write an IEP for him or her, which includes an offer of FAPE. This offer is a binding contract for services between the school district and the parent. This means that if a school does not give the services that were agreed upon within the IEP, the institution is in violation of the law. When a school is in violation of the law, the penalties may involve paying for the student's legal services, and the school district may have to provide services in compensation for the lack of services.
Least Restrictive Environment
If your child has special needs, the school also must offer education in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). By law, the district must display that it has made an effort to provide services to your child in a classroom setting that is as close to the general education setting as possible. Districts must also attempt to include him or her in the general education classroom as much as possible, unless your child has severe medical or physical impairments that require specialized staff.
IDEA
IDEA is a federal law that oversees all special education services for children in the United States. In order for a child to be eligible for special education under IDEA, his or her school performance must be adversely affected by one of the following conditions:

1. Specific learning disability (SLD)

2. Other health impairment

3. Autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

4. Emotional disturbance

5. Speech or language impairment

6. Visual impairment, including blindness

7. Deafness

8. Hearing impairment

9. Deaf-blindness

10. Orthopedic impairment

11. Intellectual disability

12. Traumatic brain injury

13. Multiple disabilities

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires all schools, other than those operated by religious organizations, to meet the needs of children with physical or psychiatric disorders. It prohibits the denial of educational services, programs or activities to students with disabilities and also prohibits discrimination against your child with a disability.

You should never feel guilty about being demanding and advocating for your child. Insisting that your child receive these services is your duty as a parent. You should also not allow school officials to pressure you into remaining quiet. You must be proactive, even though it seems daunting.

However, the process can be difficult and confusing. If you feel overwhelmed and you need help, please contact us.

American Disability Association is dedicated to the wellbeing and protection of children with disabilities and actively provides support to enhance their quality of life. Whether you are dealing with federal or state benefits or struggling with a school district to get proper education for your child, we have the resources to help you. Many individuals and families managing a disability are not aware of the wide array of services available to them, or they do not know how to apply for these benefits in a way that is likely to succeed.

Contact us for help. Dial (888) 323-2133 or email us at [email protected]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Your Educational Rights as a Parent of a Child with a Disability - American Disability Association

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's tough as a parent of a child with a disability. When your child starts school, you hope that the teachers and school staff have your child's best interests in mind. But how do you know if your... Read More

# data[].attributes.body
Some parents come forward with concerns about the time limit of 30-minutes during a meeting. So what can a parent do if the time is too short? The first is to document the problem, and then provide facts that support your concerns. For instance, writing a letter or emails to the school.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When is an IEP meeting too short? Can an IEP team review and revise a child’s IEP in 25-30 minutes?

Is your school district imposing short, rigid time limits to review and revise IEPs? Here is what we are hearing . . .

“The team said our meeting was from 7:45 until 8:10. They are ‘cracking down’ on times for IEP meetings because teachers need be in class.”

“I had to pick one 30-minute slot for a meeting to develop next year’s IEP. If the team needs more time, I have to schedule another meeting which is unlikely to happen before the school year ends.”

What do you think? Can an IEP team review and revise an IEP in 25-30 minutes?

We agree – people waste a great deal of time in meetings. IEP meetings are no exception. The solution to this problem is ensuring that IEP team leaders are trained to organize and manage efficient meetings that produce educationally useful, legally correct IEPs.

When administrators place arbitrary time limits on IEP meetings, they create a no-win situation. The IEP team will be forced to ignore the legal requirements for reviewing and revising IEPs. (For the legal requirements for reviewing and revising IEPs, please see Chapter 11 in Wrightslaw: All About IEPs (ISBN: 978-1-892320-20-9, 192 pages).

The IEP team won’t have time to receive input from some school members who are required to attend or to address the parent member’s concerns. These team members will feel disappointed and resentful and will view future meetings as a waste of time. Who can blame them?

What can you do if you are offered a meeting time that is simply too short?

Your To-Do List

If you are dealing with arbitrary time limits on IEP meetings, we suggest you do two things:

* document the problem by sharing your experiences, and

* provide facts that support your concerns.

1. Document the Problem

Write a short letter, note, or email to the school principal, with copies to the district special ed director and superintendent. The letter should document your experiences and your concerns about the negative impact of one-size-fits-all (“all children with disabilities are the same”) time limits.

Tip: People don’t have time to read long letters so your letter needs to be short and sweet.

In your letter or email, introduce yourself (briefly) as the parent of a child who receives special education services through an IEP at XYZ School. Briefly describe what you were told about time limits on IEP meetings.

Tip: You are writing to a person who has the power to resolve the problem. Use words like “you,” “we,” and “our” to make your letter and the problem more personal.

“I am confused. I’m hoping you can help.” An IEP team is required to discuss and make decisions about many issues, including the child’s present levels, needs, measurable goals, services, progress, accommodations, and placement. An IEP team cannot review the data and revise an IEP in 25-30 minutes.

“I assume you [principal / sped director / superintendent] don’t know that staff is placing arbitrary time limits on IEP meetings.”

“I appreciate your response to my concerns. [Be sure to include your contact info.] If you have questions about these concerns, please contact me at work (888-555-9876) or at home (888-555-1234) after 6 p.m. I appreciate your help and quick response.”

2. Include Information that Supports Your Concerns

Download and print two tools designed to help parents and teachers develop educationally useful, legally correct IEPs. Attach or include these documents with your letter or email.

IEP Pop-Up Tool – Developing a Child’s IEP (12 questions and answers) – When you click questions in the Pop-Up Tool, you get the legally correct answers (what IDEA requires), the law and/or regulation that supports the answers, and a list of resources.

IEP Checklist – Is the IEP Individualized? When you answer the questions in the IEP Checklist, you will know if your child’s IEP is individualized, as the law requires. IEP Checklist (PDF)

If you struggle to get appropriate services for your child or you struggle to provide appropriate services for your students, we hope this plan will help.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What To Do When the IEP Meeting Is Too Short

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"The team said our meeting was from 7:45 until 8:10. They are 'cracking down' on times for IEP meetings because teachers need be in class." "I had to pick one 30-minute slot for a meeting to develop next year's IEP.

# data[].attributes.body
The names "long COVID" and "long haul COVID" refer to the physical, mental, and neurological symptoms that persist following a coronavirus infection in children, adolescents, and adults. Long COVID can disrupt learning and other areas of life. On July 2021, the Department of Educationpublishedd Long COVID under Section 504 and the IDEA.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
The Wrightslaw Way | Special Education Law and Advocacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Many children and young adults who planned to return to school in the fall struggle to recover from "long COVID."

The terms "long COVID" and "long haul COVID" refer to lingering physical, mental, and neurological symptoms that affect children, adolescents, and adults after a coronavirus infection. The severity and duration of symptoms vary.

In long COVID, debilitating health issues often disrupt schooling, sleep, mood, daily and extracurricular activities, and other areas. Common symptoms include headache, "brain fog," exhaustion, dizziness, and heart palpitations. Recovery time is unclear.

Long COVID may be a disability under the IDEA, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.

In July 2021, the Department of Education published Long COVID under Section 504 and the IDEA: A Resource Guide to Support Children, Students, Educators, Schools, Service Providers, and Families (8 pages) to address the developmental and educational implications of long COVID for children and students.

The Long COVID Resource Guide provides information about long COVID as a disability and the responsibilities of schools to provide services and reasonable modifications to children and students for whom long COVID is a disability.

The Long COVID Resource Guide has four sections:
1. Background Information About Section 504 and IDEA
2. What Is Long COVID and What Is Its Impact on Children and Students?
3. Protections and Services under IDEA and Section 504 for Children and Students with Long COVID
4. What to Do If a Child or Student Is Experiencing Long COVID
Related Articles
'This Is Really Scary': Kids Struggle With Long Covid. (The New York Times, August 8, 2021)

Long COVID and kids: scientists race to find answers. (Nature, July 14, 2021)

Long COVID afflicts kids too. Here's what we know so far. (National Geographic, June 10, 2021)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Long COVID under Section 504 and IDEA: A Resource Guide for Children, Students, Educators, Schools, Service Providers, and Families | The Wrightslaw Way Long COVID under Section 504 and IDEA: A Resource Guide for Children, Students, Educators, Schools, Service Providers, and Families The Wrightslaw Way

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many children and young adults who planned to return to school in the fall struggle to recover from "long COVID." The terms "long COVID" and "long haul COVID" refer to lingering physical, mental, and neurological symptoms that affect children, adolescents, and adults after a coronavirus infection. The severity and duration of symptoms vary.

# data[].attributes.body
Your kid may be aggressive for a variety of reasons, including their developmental age and cognitive abilities, or frustration at not being able to speak or accomplish what they want to do. It's critical to figure out what's causing their behavior so you can devise the greatest approach for helping them overcome it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Dealing with aggressive behaviour in special needs children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Aggression in special needs children can be common and difficult for everyone involved. No parent wants their child to be upset and use aggressive behaviour. In this blog SpecialKids Company will look at the signs of aggression in children with special needs and explore various strategies that can be used to reduce aggression.

# data[].attributes.body
A student in special education was being mainstreamed in a general education P.E. class. During this class, it was observed that the P.E. teacher was using a tape barrier to segregate this student from others in the class. Ms. Norris, a special education teacher, took notice of this and reported the incident to the principal. Nothing had changed, and the student continued to be segregated. The parents learned about this and quickly requested a special education due process hearing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Update on Meagan Norris' Case: Opelika School Board to pay $320,000 to special ed teacher to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The case was scheduled for a jury trial in federal court in January 2021. (Associated Press, 12/17/20)
<

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

In December 2018, a special education teacher filed a Section 504 / ADA retaliation lawsuit against her former employer.

On November 18, 2020, the judge issued a decision in her case. What is the next step? The Jury Trial is scheduled for January 11, 2021.

Retaliation is not unusual in many schools. Teachers, parents and other family members often experience retaliation when they advocate for children with special needs. Sometimes, retaliation takes the form of false reports to protective services alleging child abuse. Many contact Wrightslaw, seeking advice.

Meagan Norris is a special education teacher. After she advocated for of one of her students, a child with Down syndrome, the Opelika City Schools Board of Education (OCBOE) retaliated against her. Ms. Norris filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging that the school district retaliated against her because of her advocacy. The school district disputed her allegation and claimed Ms. Norris was terminated because of "performance-related issues.''

In this case, the student had an IEP that required him to be mainstreamed with regular education students for Physical Education (P.E.) Ms. Norris observed the child's P.E. teachers using a tape barrier to segregate this child from others in his class.

Ms. Norris reported the P.E. teachers' actions to the principal, expecting him to right the wrongs. When she expressed her opposition to what she observed, she said: "This cannot happen. It's segregation. It's hurtful. At the end of the day, forget the legal side of it, it's just mean." But nothing changed. The P.E. teachers continued to use the tape barrier to segregate her student.

After the father learned that his child was being segregated, he requested a special education due process hearing against OCBOE. The parent's evidence included a video of Ms. Norris and her position about Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) and mainstreaming his child.

While the due process hearing decision was pending, the P.E. teachers told the principal that they observed Ms. Norris drop a special education student after holding him by an arm and a leg.

This time, the principal took action. He "spoke with Norris's two assigned paraprofessionals, Dunn and Allen, neither of whom confirmed the incident reported by the P.E. teachers." He did not discuss the allegations with Ms. Norris. Without telling Ms. Norris, he took action - he reported her for child abuse.

The child's parent prevailed in the due process hearing. The school district did not appeal the decision.

After the due process decision was issued, the superintendent recommended that the OCBOE not renew Ms. Norris' teaching contract for the next year.

Two Alabama trial attorneys, Max Cassady and William "Bo" Johnson III, filed Meagan Norris' lawsuit in federal court. (See "The Story Behind This Story" below.)

In the Complaint, Ms. Norris alleged that the school district retaliated against her in four ways:

&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(1) she was reported to DHR on a false allegation of child abuse,
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(2) she was removed from her classroom,
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(3) her efforts to obtain her master's degree were threatened, and
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(4) her teaching contract was not renewed.

You can read and download the Complaint in Meagan Norris v. Opelika City Board of Education here:

https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/pleadings/AL.norris.complaint.504ada.pdf

Judge Issues Decision in Special Ed Teacher's Case

On November 18, 2020, U.S. District Court Judge R. Austin Huffaker, Jr. issued a decision in Megan Norris' retaliation case. Before making a decision, Judge Huffaker reviewed extensive deposition transcripts, affidavits and briefs filed by the parties. In the decision, he describes the facts, legal issues, and why he ruled as he did.

Retaliation is a violation of the ADA and Section 504

The Judge wrote that: "Norris contends that she was subjected to retaliatory treatment in violation of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act after, during her second year of teaching, she advocated for one of her special education students who was wrongfully segregated in violation of the IDEA during the student's physical education class."

"Norris contends that retaliation occurred in four ways:

&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(1) she was reported to DHR on a false allegation of child abuse,
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(2) she was removed from her classroom,
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(3) her efforts to obtain her master's degree were threatened, and
&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp(4) her teaching contract was not renewed."

"The OCBOE denies that Norris engaged in any protected conduct and that any retaliation occurred, and it further asserts that there were legitimate . . . reasons for each action."

"To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, Norris must establish that (1) she engaged in statutorily protected expression; (2) there was an adverse action against her; and (3) there is a causal link between the protected expression and the adverse action." (Emphasis added by Wrightslaw, not the Judge.)

Child Abuse Allegations

"While she ultimately was cleared of the child abuse allegations, Norris contends that because she was, in fact, investigated for child abuse, her name is now permanently on DHR's child abuse registry, and future employers '[w]ill know that she was accused of abuse of one of her students.' "

"Here, the Court concludes that . . . the OCBOE's report of Norris for child abuse to DHR constitutes an actionable retaliatory adverse employment action. Because of the investigation that followed the report to DHR, several of Norris's co-workers were interviewed and thereby made aware of the abuse allegations. Norris will be forever stigmatized by the accusation, and her name will be attached to an accusation of child abuse by future prospective employers who make inquiries in the DHR database."

"While 'trivial harms' and 'petty slights' do not constitute adverse employment actions, a report of child abuse to DHR about an educator, even if later proven inaccurate or unsubstantiated, appears to rise above 'trivial harms' and would dissuade a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination."

"At oral argument, however, the OCBOE walked back the assertion that it was obligated to report Norris when it acknowledged that it was under no obligation to report a frivolous complaint of abuse."

Performance Evaluations

"Principal Carpenter and others insisted Norris's performance issues were the basis for the decision to nonrenew her contract, but Norris nonetheless had received favorable written performance evaluations during her two years with the OCBOE." "These included mostly neutral-to-favorable written evaluations, including favorable evaluations from Special Education Coordinator Landry-Booth and Principal Carpenter."

"In her deposition, Special Education Coordinator Landry-Booth acknowledged that Norris delivered FAPE to each of her students during the entire 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 school years and that she never believed otherwise."

"Nor did Principal Carpenter testify that Norris failed to provide FAPE to each of her students. He also agreed that Special Education Coordinator Landry-Booth's April 20, 2018, written report concluded that Norris was delivering FAPE to each child in her class."

"Furthermore, Norris notes that the only individuals that were not providing FAPE or following the required IEPs were the P.E. teachers who accused Norris of abuse, who the hearing officer found were violating IEPs, and who were not terminated or disciplined in any significant manner."

Protected Activity

The school district argued that "Norris did not engage in protected activity when she complained to Principal Carpenter in November 2017 and thereafter about the impermissible tape barrier; met with the father of C.W. on March 27, 2018 while being videotaped about the tape barrier; and participated in a pre-resolution meeting about the tape barrier on April 13, 2018."

"A person 'engages in statutorily protected activity if [she] has opposed any . . . practice made unlawful by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act . . . protected conduct also can include testifying, assisting, and participating in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing. It can also include advocacy concerning violations of the IDEA by a school district."

Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies

"In its reply in support of summary judgment, the OCBOE argues (for the first time) that Norris did not exhaust her administrative remedies as she must under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. An argument raised for the first time in a reply brief cannot be considered . . . but even if the Court did consider it, the Supreme Court has dispensed with that requirement for suits brought outside the IDEA. E.g., Fry v. Napoleon Cmty. Sch., 137 S. Ct. 743, 754-755 (2017).

Wrightslaw note: The 2017 Year in Review / Legal Developments and Cases book that includes the decision in Fry and the transcript of Justice Kagan's remarks when the decision was issued, is available in the Wrightslaw Store.

(Fry is also on our website at https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/2017/ussupct.fry.napoleon.15-497.pdf )

"If, in a suit brought under a different statute, the remedy sought is not for the denial of a FAPE, then exhaustion of the IDEA's procedures is not required . . . Norris is not seeking relief for denial of C.W.'s FAPE, which was already addressed in the due process hearing requested by the child's family; rather, Norris is suing for retaliation for repeatedly reporting to Principal Carpenter the tape barrier."

You can read the full text of Judge Huffaker's decision here:

https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/2020/al.norris.opelika.retaliate.pdf

What is the next step in Meagan Norris' case? The Jury Trial is scheduled for January 11, 2021.

Two Attorneys: The Story Behind This Story

In 2017, Max Cassady, an Alabama trial attorney, attended the week-long Institute of Special Education Advocacy (ISEA) at the William & Mary School of Law in Williamsburg, Virginia.

Max's trial skills and dedication to children with special needs were impressive. In 2018, Max returned to the Institute as a faculty member.

On October 2, 2017, another Alabama trial attorney, William "Bo' Johnson, III, prevailed before the Eleventh Circuit in a Section 504 / ADA case, styled as J.S. v. Houston County Bd. of Ed. It was alleged that school staff physically abused a child with special needs. This case, like Fry, is also in our 2017 "Year in Review" book. We marked it as one of the "Cases of the Year."

The Complaint that Bo filed in federal court is located on our website at https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/pleadings/AL.houston.complaint.jury.pdf.

At that time, we did not know Bo. However, in 2018, when Max was one of our faculty, Bo attended ISEA. Max and Bo developed a strong friendship and began collaborating on special ed cases, including this teacher retaliation case.

Another Teacher Retaliation Case: One Million Dollar Jury Verdict

This Norris v. Opelika City Bd. Ed. retaliation case is strikingly similar to the Pamella Settlegoode v. Portland (OR) Public Schools retaliation case.

Dr. Pamella Settlegoode, an adaptive PE teacher, was retaliated against and fired after she advocated for students with disabilities. Dr. Settlegoode sued Portland Public Schools and her supervisors. On November 16, 2001, a jury found for Dr. Settlegoode on all claims. They awarded her One Million Dollars and ordered another $50,000 in punitive damages against the director of special education and an assistant.

We followed the case closely and Pete was in regular contact with the attorneys as it progressed through the U. S. District Court, the Jury Trial, and the Court of Appeals decision affirming the award.

We wrote about Pamella Settlegoode's retaliation case here:
https://www.wrightslaw.com/info/retaliate.settlegoode.htm

Dr. Settlegoode's Federal Court Complaint is here:
https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/pleadings/or.complaint.settlegoode.pdf

The Jury Instructions are here:
https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/pleadings/or.juryinstructn.settlegoode.pdf

The Ninth Circuit's ruling upholding the jury's award is here: https://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/04/9th.settlegoode.portland.htm

CONTACT INFORMATION BELOW
Henry "Max" Lomax Cassady, Jr.
Cassady & Cassady, P.C.
23710 US Highway 98; Suite D
Fairhope, AL 36532
251-578-5252
Email: maxcassady |at| gmail.com
Certified Trial Attorney, National Board of Trial Advocacy (NBTA)
http://www.southalabamalawyers.com
https://www.maxcassady.com

William "Bo" Tipton Johnson, III
Kirby Johnson, PC
One Independence Plaza Drive; Suite 520
Birmingham, AL 35209
205-458-3553
Email: bjohnson |at| kirbyjohnsonlaw.com
https://kirbyjohnsonlaw.com/bios/bo-johnson/

END

Created: 12/2/2020
Revised:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Pete Wright and Pam Wright, Wrightslaw.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School District Retaliates Against Special Education Teacher Who Advocates for Child with Down Syndrome

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Update on Meagan Norris' Case: Opelika School Board to pay $320,000 to special ed teacher to settle a retaliation lawsuit. The case was scheduled for a jury trial in federal court in January 2021.

# data[].attributes.body
The most common claim made by parents in failure to implement instances is that a school district denied their child FAPE because a portion or all of their child's IEP was not implemented. Even if the IEP was procedurally or substantively accurate, the courts have held that when a school district fails to execute an important or major portion of the IEP, the district may be in breach of a student's entitlement to FAPE.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In two seminal special education cases heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) and Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017), the High Court fashioned a two-part test that hearing officers and judges were to apply to the facts of the case when determining if a school district provided a free appropriate public education (FAPE) as required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The two-part test, which was developed in Rowley and clarified in Endrew F., is as follows:

Part one: Has a school district adhered to the procedural requirements of the IDEA? The first part of the test was from the Rowley ruling. In this part of the test, the hearing officer or judge determines if the school district followed the numerous procedures of the IDEA (e.g., membership of an IEP team, required components of an IEP).

Part two: Was a student’s IEP reasonably calculated to enable the student to make progress appropriate in light of the student’s circumstances? The second part of the test, which is the substantive or educational benefit component, is from the Endrew F. ruling. Whether a school district meets this standard of FAPE requires an examination made of the likely or actual results of a student’s IEP (Zirkel, 2017).

In addition to the procedural and substantive requirements of the IDEA, there is also a third area that is important for school personnel to adhere to when conferring a FAPE: Implementing a student’s IEP as agreed upon by the IEP team. Although only a few circuit courts have examined the issue of a school district’s failure to implement a student’s IEP, and the U.S. Supreme Court has not examined head a failure to implement case, it is a very important area of which school district personnel need to be aware.

The primary assertion parents have made in failure to implement cases is that a school district denied their child a FAPE because the district failed to implement a portion or perhaps all of their child’s IEP. The positions the courts have been taking is that when a school district fails to implement an important or material part of the IEP, the district may be in violation of a student’s right to a FAPE, even in situations when the IEP was procedurally or substantively correct. In 2017, in a case out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th circuit, the court cautioned that “an IEP, like a contract …embodies a binding commitment and provides notice to both parties as to what services will be provided to the student during the period covered by the IEP (M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High School District 2017, p. 1197). The IEP is not like a contract in that it is not a guarantee of results but it is like a contract in that school district personnel are guaranteeing to provide certain special education and related services to a student. To the extent that a school district failed to provide the services as agreed upon in the IEP, that could be a denial of FAPE.

Perhaps the most significant case to address a school district’s failure to implement a student’s IEP was Van Duyn v. Baker School District 5J (2007). The case was heard in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which comprises the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. The approach this circuit court took to ruling on the school district’s failure to implement a student’s IEP has been termed the “materiality-alone approach” (Zirkel, 2017). In a 2 to 1 ruling, the court found that ), a material failure to implement “occurs when there is more than a minor discrepancy between the services a school provides to a disabled child and the services required by the child’s IEP” (p. 822). Thus, when a school district commits such an error, it is likely they have denied a student a FAPE.

Other U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, including the fourth circuit (Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia) in Sumter County School District v. Heffernan (2011) and the eighth circuit (Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) in Neosho School District v. Clark (2003) have also used the materiality-alone standard when addressing failure to implement. In the most recent ruling out of the U.S Courts of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, L.J. v. School Board of Broward County, Florida (2019) asserted that “A material implementation failure occurs only when a school has failed to implement substantial or significant provisions of a child’s IEP” (L.J., 2019, p. 1211).

What do these decisions mean for special education teachers? A material or substantial failure to implement a student’s IEP will likely be a FAPE violation. Examples of such failures could include (a) not implementing a student’s behavior intervention plan, (b) failing to provide special education services, related services, supplementary services, or program modifications that were included in a student’s IEP, (c) providing fewer hours of services that were included in a student’s IEP, and (d) delaying the implementation of an IEP.

It is likely that Congress, the U.S. courts of appeals for the various circuits, and possibly the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually hear a FAPE case regarding a school district’s failure to implement a student’s IEP. In the meantime, school districts should adhere to the U.S Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s assertion that an IEP embodies a binding commitment between school-based personnel and a student’s parents. School district officials need to ensure that the special education services included in a student’s IEP be implemented as agreed upon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Denying FAPE by Failing to Implement a Student’s IEP

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In two seminal special education cases heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, Board of Education v. Rowley (1982) and Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017), the High Court fashioned a two-pa…

# data[].attributes.body
Jane DuBovy expresses in this blog the process of learning about the services her son could receive through the school district, Los Angeles Unified, to assess her child for services. Unfortunately, the district offered an education plan that did not address her child's unique needs. She filed for due process, and within 30 days she DuBovy was able to attended mediation with the District as well as brough PAI as support. The case was settled with her child receiving one on one trained behavior aide and behavior supervision, private LAS, OT, social skills, and RT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Is your child being called "lazy" by their teachers?

Does your child have friends at school?

How many birthday parties is your child being invited to?

Do your child's teachers say your child is "stupid?"

Do you spend hours each night fighting with your child doing homework?

Does your child come home from school and just "melt down?"

Have you tried to talk to the school about your child's behaviors?

Are you scared for your child's future?

Do you feel isolated because your child doesn't "fit in" with other children their age?

Does the school make you feel like you're a "bad" parent?

Does the community make you feel like you're a "bad" parent?

I've been through all of this with my son. Starting when he was about 2.5 years old his behavior changed. He was sensitive to noise and lights. He lost his intelligible speech. He couldn't be close to other kids without withdrawing or screeching in a high pitch voice. He couldn't go into stores because of all the stimuli, such as lights and sounds of people. I was scared for him and didn't know what had happened to my delightful beautiful funny boy. The doctor wasn't helpful. I didn't know where to turn to find out what was wrong.

Finally, a friend who happened to be a child psychologist, told me to have my son assessed by a speech specialist. I didn't even realize that there were speech therapists for children. I didn't know where to look to find one who was competent. This was 17 years ago and the internet wasn't an option. After asking around I found one. After her assessment of him what I learned was scary. She suspected Autism. Again, 17 years ago that possibility was very scary. I had known about Autism but it was from the dark ages. Children lost to their own world, refrigerator mothers and other ridiculous theories. Institutionalization was the only end result. My fear pushed me to find help.

I was introduced to UCLA and the NPI program for children with Autism. Dr. B.J. Freeman confirmed the diagnosis and recommended this intensive 8 hour per day program. The assessments and therapies provided included Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical Therapy (PT), Recreational Therapy (RT), Language and Speech (LAS), Behavior intervention, Academic preparation and Social Skills (SS). In addition, he was going to be part of research regarding the development of "joint attention" in children with Autism. I had no clue what all of this was. I began my education in learning how these therapies could help my child. The first day I left my child at this program which was conducted behind locked doors at the Neuropsychiatric Institute I broke down and cried. What was going to be in store for my child? Am I doing the right thing?

This program was a life saver for him and me. They provided me with parent training, information and support. They helped toilet train my child, introduce him to sharing with other children, finding his speech, learning how to play, de-sensitizing him to textures, learning to coordinate his fine and gross motor skills and start to find his way back to "typical."

After 10 weeks of this program (which was very expensive but luckily good insurance covered the cost) I learned that the next step was to contact my school district, Los Angeles Unified, to assess my child for services. I was shocked! I didn't even realize that school districts provide anything to children who were not attending school or at least old enough to attend school. When I learned that starting at age 3 the district was liable to provide educational support to my child I was ready to hop on that train.

I took a letter to my local elementary school, Marquez ES, asking for assessments in all areas of suspected disability. I wouldn't have known what those areas were until my parent education at the UCLA NPI program. I also didn't realize how long it would take for this assessment process. I was lucky, the assessment plan came right away and the assessments and an IEP meeting were conducted within the statutory time frame of 60 days. (By the way I had no idea what an "IEP" was)

I thought that with the wonderful assessments and reports from the UCLA specialists the District would not have to conduct all the assessments. Again, I learned that I was very ignorant of this process. The District did review the assessments but it did not accept the recommendations by these autism specialists. I was shocked to hear the District offer an educational plan that would not address my child's unique needs. (unique is another key word that I learned. The "I" in IEP stands for individual and that was what each child is entitled to)

What was I supposed to do? The District's offer of "FAPE" (free and appropriate public education) looked nothing like the program recommended by the UCLA team. FAPE is mandated by the federal law called for short IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.) I wouldn't accept anything less than what the experts stated was necessary for my child. I had witnessed the effects of untreated autism through my master's program in psychology (in the 1970's) and I was not going to deny my child whatever it would take to help him.So I fought.

I know, being a lawyer you would think that this is what I do all the time so what's the big deal? It is a big deal when it's your child your fighting for. There is no impartiality, no weighing the options, most importantly NO COMPROMISE. I filed a legal action called a due process complaint. I didn't know how to do this or what it should contain. I had to learn all of this and quickly as I felt that each day without appropriate services was a day lost permanently.

Within 30 days or so of filing the due process complaint I attended a mediation with the District. Again, I was very lucky to have such great support. I had an advocate from PAI ( Protection and Advocacy now called Disability Rights) who was extremely experienced with the process attend the mediation with me. I also had the support from my local regional center. (that's an important resource for parents of children with developmental disabilities funded under the Lanterman Act in California). I had really knowledgeable people from the District who reviewed all the documentation and listened to my advocates. My case was settled and my child received all the recommended services. His preschool program that he ultimately had included enrollment in a typical preschool 5 hours per day, 1:1 trained behavior aide and behavior supervision, private LAS, OT, Social Skills and RT. He received this program for 3 years and the District paid for it entirely.

Each year I reviewed his program with his private providers and the District at his annual IEP meeting. The program was tweaked depending on his ever changing needs. During 4th grade he started experiencing more separation from his peers as the demands for participation in team sports (especially important at that time for boys) were very challenging for him. We found tennis and that became his life saver. (By the way there is a charity now called Aceing Autism that I fully support. it is run by an amazing man, Richard Spurling, who combined his love for tennis with his knowledgeIof autism, check it out).

Along the way I had to file a few more lawsuits to insure my child's rights. One more against the District, which actually went to hearing and we won. (This was for RT services) I think the toughest thing is to sit and listen daily to witnesses talk about your child and then having to testify yourself. I did not come through this without shedding a few tears. Another lawsuit was against the regional center for RDI services (relationship development intervention, go to www.rdiconnect.com to learn more of that service). Again, had to go through a trial, but with the wonderful experts we won. Finally, had to sue the Boy Scouts under the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act), we settled and I'm forbidden to discuss the settlement but let's just say I'm glad I did it.

Middle school was where the next major challenge occurred. Wow, while middle school is tough for the "typicals" it was impossible for my child. He knew he couldn't navigate the sophisticated demands of this social domain. Did I mention that we live on the Westside of Los Angeles County? That is a very aware group of kids and they were not tolerant of anyone who was different. They weren't bad kids just trying to survive these years themselves and there was no room for the "unique." Another brief fight with the District and my son was moved to a non-public school (NPS). He attended a program at this school that specialized in serving the needs of high functioning autistic kids. This was the right move for him.

He thrived in that environment. At the time he attended there was a wonderful teacher, a gifted program and a very enlightened and caring principal. He made friends, discovered a music buddy (my son plays drums) and even learned about girls. Although this was the right environment for him there were still the annual IEP meetings and his unique needs continued to change. At one point he needed a 1:1 behavior aide due to his work avoidance, but that was addressed. He went to prom (actually he DJ'd at the prom), decided on music as his career choice and, yes GRADUATED!!!

Since that time he has continued to work on music production. He's attended MI (Musician's Institute) in Hollywood, found a love in the production end of the music business, writes his own music (EDM, not my type of stuff but now I sound like my mother when I brought home a Bob Dylan album) and pursuing his dreams. He is a work in process. He continues to have regional center support so "Mom" isn't the "go to" resource for everything. He has a driver's license, a car and a job that he got on his own.

This saga isn't over but did I even think this was possible 17 years ago? I had entered a dark tunnel, scared, ignorant but determined. I'm really glad I didn't know all that I would have to do over the next 17 years because it would have seemed overwhelming. I've been very fortunate to have wonderful supportive people along the way. I developed such a passion for this area of law that I completely changed my focus from bankruptcy to special education. I love what I do and not many lawyers can say that after practicing for 34 years (yikes, I can't believe that either). What I love most about what I do is being there for the parents. Giving them hope and encouragement. Yes the times have changed. The number of children diagnosed as to being on the Autism Spectrum has jumped from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 64. I have no explanation for that increase but it doesn't matter to a parent if you have that child that is the "1".The fight is tougher but still winnable. And it is worth it. Every day when I have the chance encounter with my child (who is now a 6'2" grown man) I see a miracle and know that it is possible for every parent to see a future for their child that a diagnosis of Autism seemed to curtail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is your child being called "lazy" by their teachers? Does your child have friends at school? How many birthday parties is your child being invited to? Do your child's teachers say your child is "stupid?" Do you spend hours each night fighting with your child doing homework?

# data[].attributes.body
Lisa Lightner writes about the stress she, and many other mothers face when advocating for their children's services. Lightner shares stories of mothers who have even had to bargain, negotiate, and or trade just to get what their children needed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Extraordinary Burden of IEPs on Moms

"Is it getting worse?"

I sighed. Then nodded. "It is."

I was at lunch with a local administrator. We were brainstorming some ideas to make the overall climate of special education must less tense. Improve relations. Try to work together.

I wonder if we can. Here we are, 43 years past IDEA 1975. And I believe it is worse today than it was then.

Imagine this, parents. Imagine you are envisioning your child's future, and the different pieces of his/her future are trading cards. And you say, "Ok, I will give you this card for safety, and in exchange, I get to keep all the cards for food." And imagine you had to play this game with your school: "I want to have all our cards for reading so that he can read, but in order to make that happen, the school can have all my history cards. We just won't focus on history. Reading is more important than history, I suppose."

Sounds crazy, doesn't it? Well, that is what special needs moms do every day. Our society and our schools have the resources to provide things our kids need (and are entitled too, per federal law) yet we are denied access each and every day.

I run a Facebook group that goes with this blog, where parents can ask questions and offer support to each other. The group is made up mostly of moms (96%). I'm not judging. Parenting still falls on mostly moms, so why should this segment of parenting be any different, right? We may drag the dads to IEP meetings, but by and large this is ours. And it's taking it's toll.

The Extraordinary Burden of IEPs on Moms.

Moms with special needs kids have been found to suffer the same stress levels as combat soldiers, and it takes a toll on us with memory decline and other health issues. Dads do not experience these same detriments. ( side note: I am NOT saying that dads do not ever participate in the process or experience sadness and stress. Of course they do. But NOT at the same levels as moms. The aforementioned studies I just linked to state this.)

IEPs: It's all a negotiation.

I have a friend and she is currently in litigation with her school district. The sticking point is transportation. See, since our kids have special needs, you can't cram them in lots of 50 on a bus. They usually require a van with many fewer students and often an aide and a nurse. So now you are talking the bus, the driver, the aide; transportation is expensive. And her district doesn't want to provide transportation to a different school. First of all, imagine having to hire an attorney to get your child the education he needs. Why is this even OK?

And yet I find myself and others saying things like " Well, what can you give up in exchange for the transportation?" I even said this phrase: " It's all a negotiation. And we all know it's about money and transportation costs money. " I hate myself for being so practical and callous and jaded about this, yet I know so many in the field who are the same way.

Another mom chimed in, " I know it's horrible to say that; our children are entitled to their services. I have personally taken one day less of p/t for my son in exchange for a nurse on the bus. "

So imagine that. She wanted her son to be safe on the bus and he requires a nurse. But in order to get the nurse on the bus, she had to give up some physical therapy. Is this crazy or what? She has to use the various parts of his education like trading cards. And for every IEP meeting, we review our cards first. We see what we have, what cards we really need and which ones we are willing to give away, in order to get the ones we need more.

Bargaining away what our kids need in their IEP.

What other parts of our lives do we do this bargaining? Where else in life are we willing to give out something our children need, in order to get them something they need more? I can't think of any. Why can't we provide everything our kids need? Our country certainly has the wealth and resources to provide this, why aren't we? Supposedly we are guaranteed this by federal law, why is it so hard to secure?

If our children need something, and we have it available, why are we constantly denied access?

Progress is something that parents of typical kids take for granted. While not every kid is an honor roll student, most parents can reasonably assume that when their kids go to school each day, that they will be taught the curriculum and that they will reasonably progress through the grade levels. Not us.

We cannot be sure that our kids will make progress. Further more, they may even regress.

Some comments made by moms in the IEP Facebook group:

I'm exhausted, tired of being in fight mode everyday. I'm am fully convinced that my daughter is not getting an appropriate education. Too boot her last quarterly report shows that she did not achieve 1/3 of her goals. I plan to home-school her within the next years. Do I bother pointing out the obvious to the school district??

I do not believe the team is telling us the truth about what my daughter is doing everyday. She is not receiving the services as listed in her IEP. I do not believe this school really wants her and they are doing everything in their power to make us walk away and choose another placement.

I am tired year after year the boys not progressing and hearing the same thing over and over again,

My son is in the 11th grade, the high school he attends, has not followed his IEP, he has very few credits to graduate. I have meeting after meeting, I talk to his teachers an they try to say he is not doing the work, he has broke down while crying and said he just does not get it.

His present levels in his June 2015 IEP are below those in his June 2014 IEP. We tried to work with the SD all year, and all summer, but they haven't fixed the problem going forward and do not seem interested ....

Imagine your child regressing. You send them through the 6th grade, and when they finish the school year, they are below a fifth grade level. It's something we deal with all the time.

It often feels like no one cares besides other special needs moms. Change cannot happen while we constantly drain education funding. The children and families who rely on public schools the most are usually the families ostracized. How much longer are we going to take it?

IEPs: The knowledge base I wish I didn't have to have.

Here are some other statements and questions from the group:

Can anyone in PA enlighten me on the consequences of receiving a PA Standards-Based ("regular") Diploma vs an IEP Goal-Based one?

Fair and equitable grading question. My 2E son is receiving A/100% based on 'effort' (he has done the work, not necessarily correct) not learning outcomes (correctness). To me this is not an equitable grading system. Is my thinking correct?

I had my part 2 of my daughters annual iep meeting this week. My daughter is in 5th grade, with a reading fluency goal for end of 3rd grade level with a benchmark of 47 WCPM and an goal of 67 WCPM......

We met shortly after and they basically asked point blank- what do you want us to do with him?? It was a horrible meeting with the school saying basically until he fails he will stay on a 504 and not an IEP.( he ADHD/ DCD/Dyspraxia and severe anxiety )

What would you do if.....you learned your child was called lazy by her teacher in front of the entire class? Sadly, it get's worse as per her IEP she is to use dictation software for her ELA rough drafts and this teacher is making her hand write them?

Imagine constantly being on the learning curve. Yes, parenting is hard and none of us knows what we are doing all day, every day. But imagine having to learn new things about your child all the time (in addition to all the regular parenting stuff). Medications, diagnoses, therapies, evaluation scores, different curricula and pedagogy. And I haven't even gotten to the lack of a summer break for special needs moms. Between ESY and everything else, the conversation about special ed and the preparation for the next year never slows down. I keep thinking that the group activity on Facebook will slow down, it never does. We're constantly in drive or heaven forbid...park or reverse, never on neutral or cruise control. We're constantly going and planning, never taking a break for a tune-up.

It's no wonder we are exhausted and show symptoms of PTSD. Keep in mind that IEPs are just one part of special needs parenting. We have doctors, specialists, repeated surgeries, heck...some parents are just trying to keep their kids alive. And still we have to decide which of our child's needs we are going to focus on this year....what a tragic state of affairs.

I'm starting to ramble now, and some might be asking, "What is your point?"

My point is the same as always:

that we need to make proper education funding more of a priority for all kids.

Moms, know that you are not alone.

Take that much needed break.

Find your support net

contact your legislators to help facilitate change and keep on going.

You're awesome and I'm proud to be a part of this. I've never met a greater group of women.
Edited to add: I want it to be known (since I received emails) that I am not implying or stating that schools are trying to get away with something. I love teachers, I love schools, and I know that most IEP teams are doing the best they can with what they have. I can't even imagine what a blow it is to your morale for special ed professionals. You get your degrees and go into student debt so that you can help special needs kids. Only to find a job and not be given the resources to do so, when you know that as a society, we have the resources.

The whole system is broken at the federal and state levels. Which is why I am always asking parents to contact their legislators to create change. Not enough of us are doing so. And if not us, who will? As Senator Gillibrand pointed out, we have to do this if we want change.

I am glad that so many of you find validation and camaraderie in this post. If you are having trouble with your child's IEP, know that every state has a Protection and Advocacy group for people with disabilities. It can be a starting point if you don't know where else to turn.

This post was originally published in 2015. It is updated periodically to check links.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Extraordinary Burden of IEPs on Moms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Is it getting worse?" I sighed. Then nodded. "It is." I was at lunch with a local administrator. We were brainstorming some ideas to make the overall climate of special education must less tense. Improve relations. Try to work together. I wonder if we can. Here we are, 43 years past IDEA 1975.

# data[].attributes.body
Kate Swenson is the mother of four living in Minnesota. Her son Cooper was diagnosed with autism when he was three years old, and her blog discusses their family journey. She explains that when her child was diagnosed with autism, it did not only affect her son but the whole family. Her blog is a place for other families to read about Swenson's experiences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Finding Cooper's Voice | Welcome to the Secret World of Autism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Welcome to the Secret World of Autism

Finding Cooper's Voice is a safe, humorous, caring and honest place where you can celebrate the unique challenges of parenting a special needs child. Because you're never alone in the struggles you face. And once you find your people, your allies, your village....all the challenges and struggles will seem just a little bit easier.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blog - Finding Cooper's Voice | Welcome to the Secret World of Autism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
blog. Welcome to the Secret World of Autism Finding Cooper's Voice is a safe, humorous, caring and honest place where you can celebrate the unique challenges of parenting a special needs child. Because you're never alone in the struggles you face.

# data[].attributes.headline
Must Services in the IEP be Provided by a Special Ed Teacher?

# data[].attributes.subject
Must Services in the IEP be Provided by a Special Ed Teacher?

# data[].attributes.body
A parent asked, "Can a child receive reading instruction/tutoring by a specialist who is not a special ed teacher?"
The IDEA and federal special education regulations do not mandate that a child's IEP include special education and associated services given by a special education teacher.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
The Wrightslaw Way | Special Education Law and Advocacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
“My 10-year-old with Downs Syndrome made no progress in reading over the last 4-5 years. A reading specialist evaluated her and recommended a different reading program. The school agreed to provide this program. To help our child catch up, we sked for intensive tutoring by the reading specialist.

“The school told us, “we can’t write services by the reading specialist in the IEP because the specialist is not a special ed teacher.”

“This can’t be right. Can a child receive reading instruction/tutoring by a specialist who is not a special ed teacher?”

LIttle girl Laughing

Yes! The IDEA and federal special ed regs do not require that the special education and related services in a child’s IEP be provided by a special ed teacher.

Most children with disabilities receive most (or all) special education in regular ed classes taught by regular ed teachers. The IDEA requires the child’s IEP team to include at least one regular ed teacher because . . .

Regular ed teachers know the curriculum and what students are expected to learn and be able to do. With input from the regular ed teacher, the team can determine the accommodations, supplementary aids and services, and modifications the child needs to learn and make progress. (Wrightslaw: All about IEPs, page 11)

The IEP must include all special education services, related services, and supplementary aids and services the child needs and the school will provide. (Wrightslaw: All About IEPs, page 37)

If the team agrees to an instructional service but refuses to include it in the IEP, you should assume they don’t plan to provide it.

What should you do?

First, write a short note or email describing your daughter’s situation and what you were told. Ask if your understanding of the school’s position is correct. Second, request a copy of the school district policy about how special education services are provided. Does the policy say special ed services can only be provided by a special ed teacher? (I will be surprised if they have a policy on this issue).

If the school district does not respond to your email or note, write a follow-up letter requesting the policy. At the top ofyour email or letter, type “SECOND REQUEST” (attach a copy of your first request).

Please keep us posted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Must Services in the IEP be Provided by a Special Ed Teacher? | The Wrightslaw Way

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
#post_excerptWho Can Provide the Special Ed Services in an IEP?