Choosing an Expert

Things to do before signing up for an expert to do your IEE:

Check their CV.  Do they have the proper qualifications?  Do not take anyone's word that they have qualifications, even your attorney.

Find out if they are on the District's list of preferred providers - if they are, you likely don't want to use them.

Get references from other parents - you might be able to use a preferred provider, but be careful, only use them if they come reommended by other parents who have used their reports to get services for their chldren without going to court if possible.

Look at one of their reports - hopefully they have on with private information redacted or you may be able to see a friend's report.


  

Q & A Should I Walk Out of an IEP Meeting?

I can't go into specifics, but I had a huge difficulty in my IEP today and I wanted to walk out early because it was going nowhere. What should I have said? Have you ever left an IEP early for that reason? After hours and hours, I ended up not signing the IEP it and rescheduling for another day.

It's pretty difficult to know how to suggest what you should have said.  Each situation is so different.  I would never suggest walking out of an IEP early, I think you did well to stay.  I always take my IEPs home, unless it is very simple, so that I don't have to worry about what is in the paperwork as I can very clearly see that the goals are what we discussed, the services are what we discussed and the notes are simple and I can take in what it says easily.  I just did that with an IEP that was to discuss an IEE and the district agreed to do exactly what we wanted, we wrote one goal, there was no change in services, and less than half a page of notes.  But that is rare.

I would write out what I wanted to see happen, maybe even send it to the head of Special ed if you think that would help.  If you need an evaluation to back up what you wanted think about that.  Was this a Triannual IEP?  If so you are entitled to an IEE in every area you think should be addressed.  They may try to say you are only entitled to them in areas that they addressed but that isn't true, they should have already addressed all areas of suspected disability and if they didn't then you have the right to an IEE in an area that you suspect now. It is best to include your suspected concerns on the Assessment Plan, but you are not responsible for all of the assessments being on there, they are.  If it wasn't a Triannual then you may need to ask them for evaluations and then get the IEEs after they present you with evaluations because their evaluation had to be within a year.  

I think it is always better to sign for the aspects of the IEP that you agree with (though usually at home), you will also look more reasonable that way should you end up in due process later.  I usually sign for goals and services except that I may disagree with the services being so few maybe in behavioral - so I would say "I agree to implementing the IEP as it is, but I do believe that there should be more behavioral therapy than is being suggested.  I will accept what is current ly being offered but do not agree that it is enough."  Or if they are suggesting reducing or removing services I would say "I do not agree with the reduction in services offered in this IEP.  I would like to request an IEE to confirm if the reduction is reasonable and in the meantime, I would like the district to continue the services as they were presented in the last IEP."  Then I would send a letter requesting the IEE and mention the stay put for services that you have requested.  The cannot legally discontinue services or reduce them now without taking you to due process to prove that they were right.  Most often the district will need to give you the IEE unless they are also prepared to insist that their evaluation was adequate - which then means you would need to get the evaluation and pay for it out of pocket and have the expert show that their evaluation was crap, but that may be a long way out and my never happen, just trying to give you advance warning. 

EXAMPLE: Letter Re: Prior Written Notice

This isn't like the sample letters I have written, it is more an idea of how to go with this sort of letter. Since a response to a letter of Prior Written Notice could be about so many different services or assessments, etc. it becomes apparent why I have chosen to use our letter as an example rather than offering a sample. I believe that if one goes with a generic sort of letter in this case, one will get a generic sort of response which is not at all meaningful or helpful. Just a warning - my sarcastic sense of humor comes through in this particular post, but not in the meat and potatoes of the letter. Our director of special education has a name so close I couldn't help but use the pseudonym Dr. Do-Little. =)
"Chlöe"


Address
City, State, Zip
September 29, 2010


Dr. Do-Little
Director of Special Education
Unified School District
Address
City, State, Zip

RE: My Beautiful Child – D.O.B. 00-00-0000
Letter of Prior Written notice dated 9/24/2010

SENT VIA FAX AND MAIL

Dear Dr. Do-Little,

The purpose of this letter is to determine your reasoning behind denying my daughter, further outside speech therapy. In your letter of Prior Written Notice you simply state that you “respectfully deny” the request. Even with the additional two hours per week of therapy that she was receiving through Speech and Language Center for four months she was not able to meet all of her speech and language goals in the past. Now another expert has recommended that in order to overcome the issues of her Central Auditory Processing Disorder and gain from her education she requires two hours per week of Speech and Language Therapy outside of school hours, yet the district continues to say “no”.

I would think the district would take the recommendations of this expert seriously, especially considering that she is the district’s expert. I point this out to make it clear that although the district has repeatedly referred to this evaluation as an Independent Educational Evaluation it is not. It is the initial evaluation for CAPD offered by the district. This evaluation was only offered after several phone calls and my instructing district personnel on the fact that although district personnel have stated that CAPD had already been tested for, it had not since there is no district personnel legally qualified to test for CAPD. The only person qualified by law to administer testing for CAPD are audiologists, not school psychologists or speech therapists as I have been told by district personnel. Those people are only legally qualified to administer a screening test for CAPD, and given the significance of her CAPD I do not believe that the district was making even a minimal effort to screen for CAPD or it would have been revealed years ago when it could have been addressed with less difficulty and expense. In fact, had this been addressed early on, as it should have been, the district may have saved itself several thousands of dollars in overall special education expenses since from what I can gather, my beautiful daughter’s need for special education lies primarily, if not completely in her processing difficulties.

In addition, I do believe it is against the rules set forth in IDEA to conduct an IEP meeting without decision makers in attendance. Ms. DiGoo-Goo was not able to answer the question of additional speech therapy at the meeting, when in fact I believe you could have foreseen that the question might come up since the recommendation had been made in the report that the district was in receipt of well in advance of the IEP meeting on September 00, 2010.

Finally, I would ask that the district provide more than a cursory response in its Prior Written Notice, the law is clear that the district must provide an explanation, with factors that are relevant to the district’s refusal to provide necessary services as demonstrated by the expert who reported on this need in my daughter’s IEP meeting. Can you point to literature and/or other experts who would disagree with the expert the district referred us to? If so, I would wonder why the district would have referred us to her in the first place, but I believe we are owed more than a baseless opinion before we are willing to accept that this is the correct way to treat this educational condition.

Please get back to me at your earliest possible convenience and respond to my questions as well as letting me know how you intend to proceed to meet my daughter’s auditory processing disorder and speech and language issues since it is obvious that the IEP offer will not meet her needs at this time. When she was offered the services in her current IEP the district did not even realize that she had CAPD and so the district is apparently not willing to address this issue without adding further services to help her to overcome a condition that can be overcome with appropriate services.

Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me. 000-000-0000.

Sincerely,


Really Tired of the District Avoiding It's Duty to Educate our kids

cc: My attorney

Prior Written Notice - Can this Travesty be a Blessing in Disguise?

I got a letter from our SPED Head today. SPED Head is a friend's somewhat affectionate nickname for the director of special education. We just got a new SPED Head in our district. She was moved over from another department, not because she had any special knowledge of special education, but probably because she just hadn't pissed off a ton of parents in her former position. I met with her in July and she told a good story of wanting to see that morale improved with the parents and that the kids got what they needed to the best of her ability. In other words, she said what she was expected to say, used a tone that implied she cared, and then proceeded to do exactly what has been done prior to her taking the position. In other words, nothing that benefits our kids.

So the letter I got today....it was what is called a letter of "Prior Written Notice". These letters really have little to do with "prior" but they are written and of some sort of notice. Ours was to tell us that they were not going to give our older daughter the two hours of outside speech therapy that was recommended by the expert in her evaluation done by a company contracted by the district since this particular evaluation can't be done by any of our district personnel (no one employed by the district is qualified to perform the evaluation). The letter said "the district has strongly considered your request and at this time respectfully denies your request". Okay, I suppose the use of the word "strongly" is supposed to make me think they care more this time than any time in the past when they have only "considered" my requests. And as for the "respect", I don't know, but this seems pretty disingenuous to me. I mean how can one be respectful and at the same time refuse to deliberate using facts in their duty to educate our children?

For some reason, this particular letter raised my curiosity. I decided to look up what this letter is supposed to do. I found out it is supposed to include:
1) a description of the actions proposed or refused by the school district - which it did
2) an explanation of why the action was proposed or refused - which it did not
3) a description of any other options considered and the reasons those options were rejected - did not - all that was included was that they would only do what they are already doing which was below the recommended level of service recommended by the expert they chose and they paid
4) a description of each assessment procedure, test, record, or report used as a basis for the action proposed or refused - nope not included, because there was no basis for their response except that they don't want to pay for the services
5) a description of any other factors relevant to the action proposed or refused - nope, again because there is no relevant reasoning behind their response except that they don't want to offer the services ($$$$$)
6) a statement that parents of a child with a disability are protected by the procedural safeguards - the statement is there but it is meaningless since the district ignores said procedural safeguards.

I write about this because I know from talking to other parents that this is the norm. The Prior Written Notice almost never includes any explanation for districts' decisions. I have never heard of one that includes sound reasoning behind district decisions, they probably exist, but we don't hear from parents in the districts who do this correctly because they are getting their kids' needs met.

I'm not fully sure of where to go from here. I know I could file a compliance complaint but the truth is, the CDE will not apply any meaningful sanctions for this type of infraction. And that is even if they don't just find for the district because there is really little incentive for the state to actually hold districts accountable to obey the law. Once I know more I will come back to this issue and share what might work, but in the meantime if any of you know of a way to push this issue I would love the input, if districts can really be forced to use meaningful deliberation rather than just saying "no" to every request with no thought then we might have a way to get meaningful services for our children.

SAMPLE: Request for Repayment for an IEE

If you have paid for an IEE out of pocket in order to use an expert not employed or contracted with the district or SELPA you will need to gather all relevant information and send it in with a request for reimbursement. This can help you get that letter started. I would highly advise only using experts who are willing to appear at your child's IEP meeting since this is the only way they can clearly advocate for the services they believe your child requires. I have been to meetings in which the expert "appeared" by phone, and this was not at all effective. If your district will not pay for the expert to appear at the IEP meeting I would pay them out of pocket if at all possible.

Everything in italics will need to be set up with your personal information.

Your address
City, State Zip
Date


Name
Director of Special Education
Your District Address
City, State Zip

RE: Child’s Name – D.O.B. 00-00-2000

SENT VIA: method(s)

Dear Name,

The purpose of this letter is to provide copies of invoices and proof of payment and request that payment be made for the enclosed invoices for I.E.E.’s for Child’s Name.

You will find two invoices and proofs of payment to Name for providing type of testing, report writing, and attending my child’s IEP and sharing the results of their testing. The total paid to Name is amount.

You will also find invoices and proofs of payment to Name for testing, writing a report, and attending the IEP to report on their findings regarding area tested. The total paid to Name is amount.

If you have any questions regarding these invoices and proofs of payment please feel free to call me at 000-000-0000.

Sincerely,


Your Name

cc: Anyone you feel you should send a copy to

School Districts Want it Both Ways

  This is becoming a theme of mine of late.  The more I get into this process the more I realize how true this is.  They are the professionals and know what is best practice for our children.   If you haven’t gotten this idea, you haven’t attended an IEP meeting lately.  They say “no” without regard to reasonable requests.  They will say “no” to additional speech, to any Occupational therapy, to using an NPA or NPS that you prefer even if the cost is no different, or even cheaper.  It seemingly makes no sense, but they invoke the “we know what is best” line or attitude and refuse to give what you feel is best for your child (HEY, WHY SHOULD YOU KNOW WHAT ENVIRONMENT YOUR CHILD WILL DO BEST IN, HECK YOU’RE ONLY THE PARENTS!). We were straight out told that the district has all the right to decide who gives the therapy.  Since when is We v. You a team concept?!?!?! 

On the other hand -> the district wants to blame us parents for IEP’s that don’t meet our kids needs and the courts go along with it.  You signed the IEP didn’t you?  So we are too dumb to suggest what would work better for our children and we should just sit back and listen to the (so called) “experts at the school district”, but when we do and things don’t work out we should have been smarter than them and disagreed with their demands (oh I meant suggestions) at the IEP meetings.  

So which is it?  Are we supposed to be trained, expert parents who know what is going on and be taken seriously at IEP meetings?  Or are we supposed to be uninformed and stupid and just take whatever they give us without complaining?  The truth is we can’t be both, but we are treated as both, whichever suits the districts’ best interests at that particular time.  We need to get the strength to stand up and say that at IEP meetings or at resolution or mediation, and dare I say it?  Even at Due Process.  We can say it politely, by which I mean no yelling, cursing, or threatening (even though we probably feel like doing all those at one time or another) but we need to say it!  We need to take back our power and hold them accountable for their inconsistencies!

And now: A Few Words from Wrightslaw

Who is Responsible for Providing FAPE?
How to Document Your Concerns When You Disagree with the IEP Team
by Pete and Pam Wright

"My daughter has made little or no progress after years of special education. Her IEPs contain vague subjective goals and objectives. If our case goes to due process, is the school liable for not providing an appropriate education? Or, is this the responsibility of the parent who signed the IEP?"

Several factors are operating when an IEP team refuses a parent's requests for a more intensive special education program. Although school personnel view themselves as the experts on educating all children, administrators do not want to reimburse parents for services from a provider in the private sector (i.e., a trained ABA therapist or academic tutor). So the IEP team denies your request - and may blame you for having unrealistically high expectations for your child.
Some IEP teams do approve parental requests for more intensive programs. In this article, you will learn about the "free, appropriate public education " (FAPE) your child is entitled to under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. You will learn who is responsible for providing a free, appropriate public education and how it is delivered. Finally, you will learn strategies you can use if you have a disagreement with your child's IEP team.

What is a Free Appropriate Education (FAPE)

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is the law that provides your child with the right to a free, appropriate public education. The purpose of the IDEA is "to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living..." 20 U.S.C. 1400(d) (Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition, page 20).

Purpose is the mission statement of IDEA. When you develop, review, or revise your child's Individualized Education Program (IEP), re-read the Purpose of IDEA. Is the IEP designed to meet your child's unique needs? Will the goals in the IEP prepare your child "for further education, employment and independent living?" The answers to these questions will help you determine if the IEP is appropriate and provides your child with a free, appropriate public education.

Educational Benefit
Courts have held that to receive a free appropriate public education, the child must receive meaningful educational benefit. Courts have also held that while children with disabilities are entitled to a free appropriate education, they are not entitled to the "best" education, nor to an education that "maximizes" the child's potential. Strike these terms from your vocabulary.
How will you know if your child is receiving "meaningful educational benefit"? You use objective information from tests that measure your child's knowledge and skills. This is why it is essential for parents to learn about tests, what tests measure and don't measure, the bell curve, and what test scores mean.
Because this is such an important subject, and because many parents and teachers are reluctant to learn about tests and test score, Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy, 2nd Edition includes two chapters about Tests & Measurements and the Bell Curve. (See Chapters 10 and 11)

Vague Goals & Objectives

You say your child's IEP goals are vague and subjective. Sadly, this is not unusual. In special education litigation, schools attempt to defend poor IEPs by claiming that the parent "fully participated" in the IEP process and agreed to the vague goals and objectives.
Improved Outcomes
The first special education case decided in 1982 by the U.S. Supreme Court was Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Amy Rowley, 458 U.S. 176. In Rowley, the high court defined a "free appropriate public education" as "access to an education" or a "basic floor of educational opportunity."
Although some courts still cite the Rowley decision, the legal landscape is changing. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires states to adopt high academic standards for all children. The law also requires schools to test all children to determine if they are mastering these standards. When Congress reauthorized the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 2004, the focus shifted from access to the schoolhouse and compliance with procedures to improved outcomes for children who receive special education services.

Who is Responsible for Providing Free Appropriate Education (FAPE)?
To answer the question you asked at the beginning of this article, the school is responsible for providing your child with a free appropriate education (FAPE). Your child's Individualized Education Program (IEP) is the roadmap that describes how the school will provide your child with a FAPE.

How to Document Your Concerns When You Disagree with the IEP Team
If the IEP Team develops an IEP that includes vague goals that cannot be measured objectively, or the IEP team tells you to "take it or leave it," you must put your concerns in writing. These strategies will help.

1. Indicate Your Disagreement on the IEP
You are a member of your child's IEP team and a participant in the IEP development process. The law requires you to make your wishes, concerns and objections clear. You can use the IEP to make your objections clear.
If the IEP team presents you with an IEP that you believe is not appropriate, you should share your concerns. You may say that the IEP does not provide your child with enought help or the right kind of help, or that your child is not making sufficient progress. Be polite but firm.
Tip: Think about how Miss Manners would handle a difficult situation and use this to guide you.
If the IEP team asks you to sign consent to the IEP, despite your disagreement, pick up your ballpoint pen and write this statement on the IEP: "I consent to this IEP being implemented but I object to it for the reasons I stated during the meeting."
Then sign your name.
Now the school has a problem. You told them that you do not think the program is appropriate for your child. You advised them of this in writing on the IEP. You consented to the program, but you made it clear that you don't think the IEP is appropriate.
Do not be surprised if someone gets angry and says you are not allowed to write on your child's IEP - that it is a legal document. This is not true. IEPs are subject to change. Nothing prohibits any member of the IEP team from writing on the IEP document.
If someone does try to stop you, continue to write. If someone tries to pull the IEP out of your hand, continue to write, while pressing down hard with your ballpoint pen. If someone pulls the IEP away, continue to write, pressing firmly, as the IEP tears.

Stay calm. Pick up your copy of the IEP (whatever is left). Stand up and say, "Thank you, I think this meeting is over." Extend your hand to shake theirs. PIck up your recorder and leave.
This actually happened in one of my cases. When the parent began to write on the IEP, the special education director yelled "Stop! The IEP is a legal document. You are not allowed to write on it." He yanked the IEP out from under her pen as she was writing. The IEP tore in half.
Subsequently, the parent requested a due process hearing. When the school board attorney and superintendent reviewed the file and ripped IEP, the case settled quickly.

2. Tape Record Meetings
If you anticipate problems with the IEP team, you should tape record the meeting. Make sure your recorder is out in the open.

For specific advice about how to tape record meetings, read Chapter 26 about "Maintaining Control in School Meetings" in Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy.
The school has a problem. You have told them you do not think the program is appropriate for your child. You advised them of this in writing on the IEP. You consented to the program, although you made it clear that it is not appropriate.

3. Write a Letter

When you get home from the IEP meeting, you must write a polite "thank you" letter. Describe what happened during the meeting, document your concerns, what you requested, and how your input and requests were received.

Perhaps you consented to IEP being implemented because "something is better than nothing". Perhaps you decided that the school's inadequate program was better than no program at all. In your letter, you need to clarify that you believe the IEP is not appropriate for your child. Advised the IEP team that you consented to the school implementing the IEP and that you assume the school will implement it. Request another IEP meeting to resolve the outstanding issues.
If you take these steps, the school will want to avoid a due process hearing.
In Wrightslaw Special Education Law and Advocacy Training programs, participants learn the Rules of Adverse Assumptions:
* assume a due process hearing will be necessary to resolve your dispute;
* assume that all school personnel will testify against you;
* assume that the school personnel's recollection of the facts will be opposite of yours; and
* assume you cannot testify.

If you cannot testify on your own behalf, how can you make your case? What evidence do you have? The best evidence is contemporaneous evidence - written evidence created at the time of an event. You evidence is the tape and transcript of the IEP meeting, the IEP, and letters from you that describe your concerns and requests.
Learning and using tactics and strategies helps to resolve disputes before they get out of hand.

Four Rules for Parents
1. Your child is NOT entitled to the BEST special education.
hAs a parent, you must eliminate the word "best" from your vocabulary when you discuss your child's educational needs. Remember: Your child is entitled to an appropriate education. not to the best education, nor to an education that will maximize your child's potential.
2. Parent testimony carries little weight in the eyes of hearing officers and judges.
Loving parents are biased. Parents want the best education for their children with disabilities. Testimony from parents about what their child needs is not persuasive and rarely carries the day.
3. School staff will testify that their program is appropriate about 99% of the time.
At least 99% of the time, school staff will testify that their program is appropriate and the best program for the child. (Note: School staff can and do use the word "best," but parents cannot.)
4. Parents must have experts who know the child and who are willing to educate the IEP team about the child's unique needs and what an appropriate program must include to meet these needs.
If you have a dispute with the school, you need to have experts in the private sector who have evaluated and observed your child. Experts must never use the terms "best" or "maximizing potential" in their reports or testimony. Your experts should be able to describe the child's strengths, weaknesses and needs. They should describe the educational program that will meet the child's needs, why the public school program is not appropriate, if the child will be damaged if he does not receive an appropriate education, and the nature of the damage.