steering committee meeting - cahelp · 8/28/2015 · 5.3 woodcock-johnson iv training corinne...

Desert Mountain Educational Service Center

Friday, August 28, 2015

Jenae Holtz, CEO Chair

Meeting

Jenae Holtz, CEO Chair Desert/Mountain SELPA 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307 Phone: (760) 552-7700 Fax: (760) 242-5363 http://dmselpa.org

Steering Committee

CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH AND EDUCATION LINKED PROFESSIONS JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

(CAHELP JPA) STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING

AGENDA August 28, 2015

Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center 17800 Highway 18 •Apple Valley, CA 92307

1.0 CALL TO ORDER

1.1 Adoption of Agenda – August 28, 2015

1.2 Adoption of Minutes – June 12, 2015

2.0 COMMITTEE MEMBERS' COMMENTS/REPORTS

This is the time during the meeting when the California Association of Health and Education Linked Professions Joint Powers Authority (CAHELP JPA), Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA), Desert/Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (Charter SELPA), and Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) staff is prepared to receive concerns/requests regarding items on this agenda or any school-related special education issues. Discussion will include special education policies and procedures as they relate to district coordination and implementation of the SELPA and Charter SELPA Local Plan.

3.0 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REPORTS

3.1 2015 Annual Data Comparison Anomaly Report

3.2 Data Information Non-Compliance

3.3 Complex Trauma

3.4 Senate Bill (SB) 277 (Pan) Vaccination

3.5 New Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) Services Credential Criteria

3.6 People-First Language

3.7 Desert/Mountain Operations Deaf/Hard of Hearing (DHH) Services

4.0 DIRECTOR’S REPORTS

4.1 DMCC Client Services Reports

Steering Committee Meeting Agenda August 28, 2015

Page 2 of 3

5.0 PROGRAM MANAGERS’ REPORTS

5.1 2014/15 Professional Learning Summary

5.2 Professional Learning Updates

• New On-site Request Form Link

• Introduction to Restorative Practices

• Woodcock Johnson IV Training

• I-MTSS Symposium – Save-the-Date

5.3 Assessment Update

5.4 Due Process Activity Summary

5.5 Special Education Self Review (SESR)

5.6 Nonpublic Agency (NPA) & Nonpublic School (NPS) Master Contracts

5.7 SELPA Policy & Procedures

5.8 SELPA Forms

5.9 Occupational Therapy & Physical Therapy Caseloads

5.10 Director’s Handbook

5.11 Referral Manual

5.12 IEP Binders

6.0 COORDINATOR’S REPORTS

6.1 Sites Implementing PBIS

6.2 PBIS Advisory Leadership Committee

7.0 INFORMATION ITEMS

7.1 Monthly Occupational and Physical Therapy Services Reports

7.2 2015/16 Audiological Services Calendar

7.3 Monthly Nonpublic School/Agency Expenditure Report

7.4 Monthly Nonpublic School/Agency Placement Report

7.5 2014/2015 Annual Non-Public School ADA

Steering Committee Meeting Agenda August 28, 2015

Page 3 of 3

7.6 Monthly Low Incidence Equipment Reimbursement Requests Report

7.7 Professional Learning Opportunities

8.0 OTHER

9.0 ADJOURNMENT

NEXT MEETING: Friday, September 18, 2015, in the Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center, Aster Room.

CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH AND EDUCATION LINKED PROFESSIONS JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY

(CAHELP JPA) STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING

MINUTES June 12, 2015

Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center 17800 Highway 18 •Apple Valley, CA 92307

D/M SELPA Members Present: Paul Rosell Academy for Academic Excellence Jennifer Johnson Adelanto SD Dale Folkens Apple Valley USD Joni James Barstow USD Paulina Ugo Bear Valley USD Mary Ellen Johnson D/M Operations Marie Silva Excelsior Charter School Julie Kroener HSHMC Katie Wright High Tech High Vici Miller Lucerne Valley USD Nelda Colvin Oro Grand SD Cameron Smart Silver Valley USD Diane Hannett Snowline JUSD Tanya Benitez Victor Elementary SD Rama Bassham VVUHSD D/M Charter SELPA Members Present: Phillip Wallace Encore Jr. / Sr. High School Tim Smith Taylion High Desert Academy Alternates & Guests Present:

Amanda Gormley Academy for Academic Excellence Karen Elgan Hesperia USD DeShawna Chacon Oro Grande SD Francesca Copeland VVUHSD Karina Quesada Victor Elementary SD Staff Present: Matt Badawi D/M SELPA Janet Crabtree CAHELP JPA

Steering Committee Meeting Minutes June 12, 2015

Page 2 of 9

Denise Edge D/M SELPA Rhonda Evans D/M SELPA Corinne Foley D/M SELPA Marina Gallegos DMCC Diane Garcia D/M SELPA Renee Garcia D/M SELPA Colette Garland D/M SELPA Cheryl Goldberg-Diaz DMCC Stephanie Hedberg D/M SELPA Jenae Holtz CAHELP JPA Kristee Laiva D/M SELPA Linda Llamas DMCC Glenn Low D/M SELPA Maurica Manibusan D/M SELPA Kami Murphy D/M SELPA Sheila Parisian D/M SELPA Daria Raines D/M SELPA Jennifer Rountree D/M SELPA Adrienne Shepherd D/M SELPA Jennifer Sutton CAHELP JPA Michael Van Luven D/M SELPA Theresa Vaughn DMCC Natalie Velasco D/M SELPA Larry Wadsworth DMCC

1.0 CALL TO ORDER

The regular meeting of the California Association of Health and Education Linked Professions Joint Powers Authority (CAHELP JPA) Steering Committee was called to order by Jenae Holtz, Chairperson at 9:01 a.m., in the Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center, Apple Valley. The meeting Minutes for May 8, 2015 and the meeting Agenda for June 12, 2015, were adopted as presented. Jenae thanked Rama Bassham, Victor Valley Union High School District (VVUHSD) for his time of service on the Steering Committee. Rama stated he would be returning to a school psychologist position in VVUHSD. He thanked the committee members for their support throughout his service as director for VVUHSD.


Page 3 of 9

2.0 COMMITTEE MEMBERS' COMMENTS/REPORTS

Vici Miller, Lucerne Valley USD, thanked Stephanie Hedberg, SELPA Program Specialist, for sharing the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) resource guide with districts.

3.0 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORTS

3.1 Assistive Technology

Jenae Holtz reported that referrals to the SELPA for Assistive Technology (AT) assessments have tripled this past year. Jenae stated there are ways the SELPA can help build district capacity for determining if a student’s AT need can be met by using existing tools, strategies, or interventions.

Sheila Parisian explained the recently revised Assistive Technology Procedures. Sheila stated often referrals are written without considering the use of existing strategies. She then stated prior to submitting an AT referral to the SELPA, the intention is for the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team to consider utilizing existing interventions that are often already in place in teachers’ classrooms. Once existing interventions have been attempted and the student’s needs are not being met, the IEP team would contact the site/district AT facilitator to complete the Student Environment Task and Tool (SETT) framework. If the recommendations from the SETT Framework do not result in adequate progress for the student, then the AT facilitator would make the referral to the SELPA. Sheila stated the SELPA will offer additional training this year (the first two dates for SETT Framework trainings are September 2nd & November 17th). Sheila concluded districts will continue to have SELPA support for AT needs.

Jenae stated the intention of these revised procedures is to assist districts with providing students the supports and accommodations needed as quickly as possible. Jenae stated hearing no comments, the SELPA will move forward with scheduling the SETT Framework trainings. She reiterated the SELPA will continue accepting AT referrals.

4.0 DIRECTOR’S REPORTS

4.1 DMCC Clients Services Reports

Linda Llamas presented the district specific Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) Clients Services Reports. Linda reported 9,273 students have received services since July 2014. She stated the DMCC will continue providing services over the summer months and 125 students are scheduled to participate in this year’s summer therapeutic day camp. Linda also reported the DMCC was excited about receiving three additional contracts for services for children in the Yucca Valley area for the 2015-2016 fiscal year.


Page 4 of 9

5.0 PROGRAM MANAGERS’ REPORTS

5.1 Professional Learning Summary

Corinne Foley presented the Professional Learning Participation Summary. Corinne stated approximately 4,500 participants attended trainings throughout the 2014/15 year. She concluded the by-district reports follow the year-to-date D/M SELPA and D/M Charter SELPA summaries.

5.2 2015-2016 Professional Learning Guide

Corinne Foley presented the 2015/16 Guide to Professional Learning and Services. Corinne stated a few trainings have been added since the guide was initially published. She then stated that the most recent version of the guide is posted on the website at: www.dmselpa.org . Corinne encouraged directors to send her any suggestions they might have for eNews topics.

5.3 Woodcock-Johnson IV Training

Corinne Foley stated based on prior committee discussions on districts’ need for additional Woodcock-Johnson IV training, the SELPA scheduled two half-day sessions on September 30, 2015. She noted there is no cost to participate in the training; however participants are expected to bring their own kit. Corinne then stated this training will be held at the Victor Elementary School District’s training facility located on Nisqualli Road. She concluded the SELPA will correct the location on the flyer and email the revised one to directors.

5.4 DRDP (2015) Inter-Rater Study Request

Corinne Foley reported the California Department of Education (CDE) is looking for volunteers to participate in the Desired Results access Project’s (DRDP) Inter-Rater Reliability Study of the DRDP. The study will run September – November 2015. Corinne concluded directors can contact CDE for additional information about participating in this opportunity.

5.5 Program Specialists Primary Contact Districts

Corinne Foley reported the SELPA recently revised the assignments for program specialists as primary district contact. Corinne noted the new D/M Charter SELPA members are included on the new list presented today.

5.6 Due Process Activity Summary

Denise Edge reported the SELPA received two new filings since the May Steering meeting. She stated year-to-date seven cases were withdrawn or dismissed; one case went to resolution, and one to mediation. Sixteen cases settled and four went

http://www.dmselpa.org/


Page 5 of 9

to hearing for a total of 29 due process cases filed in 2014/15 in the D/M SELPA. Denise then provided a brief summary of the open cases. She stated the year is closing with two open cases, with a total of $297,277 in legal expenses and approximately $100,000 in settlement fees for attorney filings. Denise then stated that the SELPA conducted 15 Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) sessions this year and only two went forward for due process. She concluded the D/M Charter SELPA had no filings this year.

5.7 Legal Update

Denise Edge highlighted the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Case Number 2014040982 on conducting a manifestation determination (MD) for a change of placement that resulted from a School Attendance Review Board (SARB) proceeding. Denise shared that at the time of the hearing, the student was homeless. She then stated the take-away lesson is to proceed with caution when referring students with disabilities (or suspected of having disabilities) to SARB boards.

Joni James, Barstow USD, stated that as of January a SARB board can no longer transfer a student to a community day school.

Denise concluded as requested by Katie Wright, the SELPA will look at ways to provide additional instruction on the IEP process when a student is having attendance issues.

5.8 Community Advisory Committee (CAC)

Denise Edge announced the 2015/16 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Meeting dates and topics as follows:

• October 22, 2015 - Transition Services by Adrienne Shepherd, Coordinator Transition Services

• December 10, 2015 - Motor Labs by the D/M SELPA Physical Therapy Department

• February 18, 2016 - Common Core by Stephanie Hedberg, Program Specialist,

• May 12, 2016 - Executive Functioning by Carol Burmeister & Dr. Sheri Wilkins

Denise concluded directors should notify the SELPA if their CAC representative is changing for the 2015/16 year.

5.9 SELPA Forms

Denise Edge presented the following SELPA Forms for review and discussion:


Page 6 of 9

D/M 68A, 68M, & 68P (Special Education & Related Services) Denise reported these forms were revised to add check boxes for indicating whether services are being delivered individually and/or in a group setting. She stated per the California Department of Education (CDE) it is appropriate to check both individual and group for specialized academic instruction (SAI) in a self-contained setting. However for other related services if both individual and group services are being provided, the services must be listed on separate lines on the IEP. Julie Kroner, HSHMC, inquired how consultation services should be listed.

Denise stated it would be better to put consultation services on 68D under personnel supports and services. She reminded committee members that all direct services listed on 68A have to be linked a goal. She further stated nonpublic agencies should not bill for consultation with the teacher; billing should only occur when a provider works directly with the student.

Jennifer Johnson inquired about how consult services for Deaf/Hard of Hearing (DHH) should be listed.

Denise stated if a provider is working with or meeting with a student, then the services should be on 68A and goals should be reviewed.

Katie Wright, HTH, inquired about using “push-in/pull-out” instead of individual or group.

Denise stated based on OAH hearing decisions and discussions with the CDE, using individual or group would be a better way to document the services.

Mary Ellen Johnson, San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools (SBCSS), stated that in August SBCSS will have another DHH itinerant teacher on staff in the Desert/Mountain Region. Mary Ellen further stated SBCSS is restructuring their DHH and Visually Impaired (VI) services and that assessments will be done to determine the level of service a student needs. She concluded that she would like to do a presentation on the DHH and Visually Impaired (VI) services and introduce the new DHH teacher at the Steering Committee in August.

Rhonda Evans commented she is looking forward to having eligibility criteria for DHH. Rhonda stated the rubric that the new DHH itinerant teacher uses will be helpful for IEP teams to determine the level of services a student needs.

Discussion followed on credential requirements for individuals providing services for students with DHH as their primary disability, versus consultation services for students with hearing impairments that receive services in general education settings.


Page 7 of 9

Jenae stated the SELPA will move forward with the changes discussed today and if there are concerns after implementing the changes the SELPA will bring the form back for additional discussion.

Denise encouraged directors to attend an IEP training this year. The first training is on August 21st. She stated this year an IEP binder is included in the $35 registration cost. Denise noted the information is also available in the Livebinder online.

Jenae stated the SELPA will give each director a copy of the IEP training binders at the August meeting.

Denise noted the new D/M Charter SELPA members were added to page 3 of 68A.

D/M 68P (Extended School Year (ESY) Worksheet) Denise reported that when reviewing IEPs with the SELPA Occupational Therapists (OTs) she discovered that for ESY services, several had the “yes” box checked on 68P but the form was not completed in its entirety. Denise reminded directors that 68P is a worksheet for determining ESY services; however the services must also be added to the service line.

D/M 167 (Quick Stats) Denise reported the Quick Stats form is a new tool created by SELPA Intervention Specialist Maher (Matt) Badawi. Its purpose is to allow teachers/staff to share student information (in a condensed format) from an annual or triennial IEP with other staff that might need the information in order to implement the student’s IEP. Denise stated since Matt had shared the form with a few directors who found benefit in it, the SELPA decided to present it to all directors. Denise noted this is not an IEP required form but an optional resource tool.

D/M 166 (Suspension/Expulsion Data Comparison Worksheet and Report) Colette Garland reported the D/M 166 is a new form. She stated the CDE is actively analyzing the discrepancies between the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) data. Colette further stated that after running comparison reports, the SELPA discovered that there are huge differences in the data for several member districts. She then stated the D/M 166 was created as a tool for districts to use collect and match and analyze the data from the two systems. Colette noted that the reports do not include student names; however SSID numbers are required data. The SELPA is proposing that districts submit these forms monthly to the SELPA. She concluded the SELPA will present written instructions and definitions for completing D/M166 to the committee in August.

Jenae stated the CDE is looking for ways to merge the data between the two systems, however in the meantime the SELPA wants to start working with districts to ensure that we are certifying accurate data.


Page 8 of 9

D/M 164 (Preschool PBIS Letter of Intent & D/M 165 Preschool PBIS Exploration & Adoption Checklist) Kami Murphy reported these two forms will be used specifically for PBIS training and implementation at the preschool level. The language is similar to the D/M 160 and 161 forms used for K-12 school sites. Kami stated the requests for PBIS at the preschool level is much greater than initially anticipated. She asked directors to notify the SELPA as soon as possible if there is a preschool site that might be interested in participating. Kami concluded the SELPA PBIS team is hoping to have next year’s calendar finalized by the end of June.

6.0 COORDINATORS’ REPORTS

6.1 PBIS Implementation Data

Kami Murphy presented a Tiered Fidelity Inventory (TFI) report on district averages for 2014/15 Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Tier I. She stated the SELPA PBIS staff assisted districts complete this new report. She then stated the tool measures team fidelity, implementation, and evaluation. Kami noted the report is based on the total number of school district sites including alternative education sites. She further stated districts can use the TFI tool for planning for the future. Kami concluded she will forward the evaluation questions that were used to directors.

Diane Hannett, Snowline JUSD, commented that Snowline staff found value in the TFI data discussions. She noted it was encouraging for staff to be able to see the data.

7.0 INFORMATION ITEMS

7.1 County Regional Services Reports

7.2 June 2015 Pupil Count Memo

Colette Garland reminded directors that all Pupil Count Data effective July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015, must be entered into the SELPA MIS system no later than July 2, 2015. Colette stated district staff may contact her should they have any questions or anticipate problems meeting the June 2015 Pupil Count deadlines.

7.3 Monthly Occupational and Physical Therapy Services Reports

7.4 Monthly Audiology Services Reports

7.5 Monthly Nonpublic School/Agency Expenditure Report

7.6 Monthly Nonpublic School/Agency Placement Report

7.7 Monthly Low Incidence Equipment Reimbursement Requests Report


Page 9 of 9

7.8 Professional Learning Opportunities

Rhonda Evans highlighted the 2015/16 Speech and Language Pathologists (SLP) Collaboration Group Meetings and the 2015/16 Region 10 Coordinating Council SLP Committee meeting dates. Rhonda also reported there will be a training on Selective Mutism coming later in the year which will be open to all district staff.

8.0 OTHER

Denise thanked all directors for completing their SPPI data. She stated the next Special Education Self Review (SESR) templates will be similar to the templates used for the SPPI. Denise concluded Alberto Orellana and Dr. Robert Morgan from the CDE are planning to attend the August 28 Steering Committee meeting.

Stephanie Hedberg stated the SELPA is looking forward to hosting the New Special Education Teacher Summit beginning with the first two days on August 3 & 4.

9.0 ADJOURNMENT

Having no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 10:46 am.

NEXT MEETING: Friday, August 28, 2015, in the Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center, Aster Room.

Individuals requiring special accommodations for disabilities are requested to contact Daria Raines at (760) 955-3555, at least 24 hours prior to the date of this meeting.

The Relentless Pursuit of Whatever Works in the Life of a Child

California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions JPA

ANOMALY REPORT District Name Anomaly Explanation SELPA Wide Increase in 3rd Grade An increase in ADA for 3rd grade is evident to specific districts. SELPA Wide Increase in 5th Grade An increase in ADA for 5th grade is evident to specific districts SELPA Wide Increase in 7th Grade The trend from 2013-2014 to 2014-2015 is seen at the 6th grade level

to now the 7th grade level without significance. SELPA Wide Increase in OHI The anomaly report indicates an increase in 3rd graders throughout

the SELPA. 3rd graders identified as OHI are in the 3rd grade. SELPA Wide Increase in AUT This increase has been a trend since 2006 as it is across the State and

nationally. Although there is an increase, the SELPA continues to have a lower percentage that the statewide increase in the disability.

Adelanto Elementary Increase in SLD Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Adelanto School District secured a program

transfer of moderate/severe programs previously served by San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools. This change caused a direct increase in their SLD population.

Bear Valley USD Decrease in Kindergarten

Bear Valley USD has a decrease in the overall population in the mountain community. Overall ADA has decreased from 2,541 in the 2013-2014 school year to 2, 453 in the 2014-2015 school year.

Hesperia USD Increase in AUT Hesperia USD secured a program transfer of their Autism population/programs previously served by San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools. A total of 50 students were returned back to the district.

Hesperia USD Increase in 3rd Grade Hesperia USD overall has an increase in ADA. ADA was 23,528 in the 2013-2014 school year and is now 23,735 in the 2014-2015 school year. This is an overall increase of 207 students. This along with the program transfers from San Bernardino county Superintendent of Schools to Hesperia USD accounts for the increase in grade 3.

Hesperia USD Increase in 5th Grade Hesperia USD overall has an increase in ADA. ADA was 23,528 in the 2013-2014 school year and is now 23,735 in the 2014-2015 school year. This is an overall increase of 207 students. This along with the program transfers from San Bernardino county Superintendent of Schools to Hesperia USD accounts for the increase in grade 5.

High Tech High Media Decrease in SLD Changes in the assessment procedures for HTH Media have shown a decrease in SLD designation.

SB County (DMOPS) Decrease in Other DM SELPA had a cadre of individuals with more severe disabilities “age out” from the 2013-2014 school year to the 2014-2015 school year.

Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307-1219

P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org



ANOMALY REPORT District Name Anomaly Explanation Charter SELPA Wide Increase in 11th

grade Taylion High Desert Academy Charter school opened an additional site, approximately in January 2015, which is located in San Bernardino, CA. This site has a large population of high school age students and this caused an overall increase of 11th grade students from June 2014 to June 2015.

Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307-1219

P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org

SELPA SELPA NAME DIST_NAME STUDENT_ID SSID IEP TRI IEP TRI IEP TRIOverdue

IEPOverdue

Tri3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD BRIJU529A 4178539260 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD BURMA118A 1474015937 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD CASSA026A 8980883504 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD CHAOL812A 5179215442 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD CHAKA807A 7180841496 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD COOMI427A 6194140964 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD DUHBR508A 5913225268 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD GARIS925A 5178528562 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD GRIAS927A 4576200344 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD HOLRI322A 4194135900 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD LEAIS316A 5235912832 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD LEYES728A 8175938308 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD MACRO328A 3138607697 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD QUIMA227A 6159464684 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD METDA414A 7734919421 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD PARJA519A 6174840914 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD PRICH815A 6656436538 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD QUIST712A 8286598642 NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD TRAME725A 7417525375 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD WILAM607A 6180422084 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD WILDA011A 2113074955 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA ADELANTO SD ZARAI513A 2180728045 NC NC NC3651 DM Chtr SELPA Desert Trails Chtr BOYNI320A 8469706937 NC NC NC NC YES3651 DM Chtr SELPA Desert Trails Chtr SAMAR029A 2909034213 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD ALVCA818A 5596841968 NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD CLAHA206A 6382865474 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD CRUAN926A 9109051211 NC NC NC3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD GONJO231A 5166401152 NC NC NC YES

June Pupil Count

6/1/2014

December Pupil Count

12/1/2014

April Pupil Count

4/1/2015DATA IDENTIFIED NONCOMPLIANCE (DINC)

SELPA SELPA NAME DIST_NAME STUDENT_ID SSID IEP TRI IEP TRI IEP TRIOverdue

IEPOverdue

Tri3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD GONSE718A 1198534263 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD HAVER831A 8108979658 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD LAREM002A 6108979724 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD LEANA707A 6185465684 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD LOWHA209A 9728961963 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD RAMJA119A 7089089736 NC NC NC3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD REYJO715A 3109214507 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD RIVJA914A 2133540595 NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD RODAS014A 7109161716 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD ROMAD231A 2056468353 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD STOSA915A 5108967292 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD THESI112A 6081795494 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD VASMA809A 6044724944 NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA HESPERIA USD WILJA003A 8036751148 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA DMOPS GRUMI720A 4761917267 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA SNOWLINE JUSD GODBR525A 5066282452 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VICTOR ELEM DOMRA205A 2733202552 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA VICTOR ELEM HERJO125A 1159265013 NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD ALBRU806A 7071679596 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD ARENA007A 8123685298 NC NC NC NC3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD BILBE617A 2107276975 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD FLEDA122A 8134849798 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD GRALA320A 7042762056 NC NC NC NC NC NC YES YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD HENRI116A 3069483197 NC NC NC NC3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD JUAJA111A 2076686245 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD PADDE822A 8107674208 NC NC NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD PENEZ219A 2105529085 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD PHIJO112A 4429150075 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD RAMDA904A 2038315825 NC NC NC YES3601 DM SELPA VVUHSD VERMI001A 1109153733 NC NC NC YES

June Pupil Count

6/1/2014

December Pupil Count

12/1/2014

April Pupil Count

4/1/2015

latimes.com

Los Angeles Times

Students who say trauma from abuse and violence requires specialattention at school demanded that the Compton Unified SchoolDistrict immediately have teachers, administrators and staffundergo training to recognize and understand the effect of suchincidents.

The request was made Thursday in U.S. Federal Court as part ofa lawsuit filed on behalf of eight Compton students. Thelawsuit alleges that the school system has failed to properlyeducate students who have suffered from repeated violence andother trauma.

The litigation alleges that the district has failed to address theunderlying obstacles these students face and has inadequatelytrained teachers and others to provide these students anappropriate education.

U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald is expected to decide incoming weeks on whether to grant the injunction, which wouldrequire the training. He is also considering a request by the school

Compton Unified fights a lawsuit over children's 'demons' about:reader?url=http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-compton...

1 of 5 8/26/2015 3:48 PM

district to dismiss the lawsuit altogether.

The litigation could test whether “complex trauma” qualifies as adisability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. If the lawsuit issuccessful, school districts would be required to provide specialacademic and mental health services to students who havesuffered from violence and other trauma.

Interested in the stories shaping California? Sign up for the freeEssential California newsletter >>

The lawsuit describes in detail some of the traumatic episodes ofseveral students, who were frequently disciplined and kicked out ofschools and not given appropriate help and services to addresstheir problems.

One student at the age of 8 first witnessed someone being shot todeath. Since then, he has witnessed another 20 shootings,including the killing of a friend.

Another student, a Dominguez High junior, struggled academicallyafter suffering physical violence from the boyfriends of his mother, adrug addict. He was kicked out of foster care and resortedto sleeping on the roof of the high school, the lawsuit said. After hewas found by school officials, they offered no help to him, thelawsuit alleges.

The boy said he often grew enraged, sometimes believing a"demon" was within him.


2 of 5 8/26/2015 3:48 PM

Another student, Kimberly Cervantes, 18, a senior at Cesar ChavezContinuation School, stopped attending school for weeks at a timeafter several traumatic episodes, including being told by teachersthat her bisexuality was "wrong," the suit said.

Mark Rosenbaum, an attorney with Public Counsel, a LosAngeles-based pro bono law firm that filed the lawsuit along withIrell & Manella LLP, urged the court to force the district toimmediately provide the training.

"These students cannot wait for deliberations,” he said. “Theyare being stopped at the schoolhouse door. They come to schoolnot even knowing they suffer from complex trauma but then theyare treated differently.… This is about equal access to education."

Attorneys representing Compton Unified said that the districtalready trains teachers in "trauma-sensitive practices" and that thelawsuit infringes on the discretion district officials have in trainingtheir own teachers and staff.

In an interview, attorney David Huff said the district responds tostudents who have a disability and works to provideaccommodations and services on an individual basis.

The lawsuit could potentially label all students at Compton schoolsas disabled simply because they live in an area of socioeconomicdisadvantage, he said.

Huff said the school district does not dispute that each of thesechildren has suffered trauma, but added that the plaintiffs have not


3 of 5 8/26/2015 3:48 PM

demonstrated that any of them now have a physical or mentalimpairment as a result.

“That’s what disability means under the law,” he said.

Rosenbaum said that students who experience repeated violenceand other trauma are not as easily identified as other students withdisabilities.

"If you see a child in a wheelchair, you see immediately that youhave to make accommodations," he said. "With these children, youcan't physically tell unless you understand how trauma operates inthe brain."

Rosenbaum said that these and other students are stigmatized byschool officials who resort to punitive disciplinary policies thatfurther disrupt their education. By pinning their troubles on a lack ofeffort or interest, school officials ignore the debilitating effect thatviolence and other trauma has on a student's ability to learn.

"They are in desperate straits in terms of having a meaningfuleducation," Rosenbaum said. "It is a disservice to them to notrecognize their resilience."

The judge said he will probably issue a ruling on the motions incoming weeks, and urged both sides to consider negotiating asettlement.

For more court news, follow @sjceasar


4 of 5 8/26/2015 3:48 PM

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times


5 of 5 8/26/2015 3:48 PM

This project was funded by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), US Department of

Health and Human Services (HHS). The views, policies, and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect those of SAMHSA or HHS.

Complex trauma describes both children’s exposure

to multiple traumatic events and the wide-ranging,

long-term impact of this exposure. These events are

severe, pervasive and often interpersonal, such as

abuse or profound neglect. They usually begin early

in life, may disrupt many aspects of the child’s

development, and interfere with the child’s ability to

form secure attachment bonds. Many aspects of a

child’s healthy physical and mental development rely

on this primary source of safety and stability.

That was the case with Renee, a third grader who was in foster care due to numerous

domestic violence complaints as well as inadequate supervision and housing. Her teacher

at that time described Renee as a “sweet girl” who was at times “overly sensitive.” Although

she got along with the other children in her class most of the time, she “blew up” on several

occasions during lunch time and recess, at one point running from the cafeteria and hiding

in the hallway. In class, the teacher noticed that Renee often appeared sad or tired and

frequently seemed to be daydreaming. She had difficulty following directions and often did

not complete homework.

Complex Trauma:

Facts For Educators

Complex trauma can have devastating emotional, behavioral, social, and cognitive effects on

students of all ages. Students' confidence and ability to cope with stress and change are also

affected. These students may believe they are incapable of succeeding in school and are more

likely to give up when faced with challenging tasks—or they may avoid tasks altogether.

Relationships with peers, teachers, and school personnel are affected as students struggle to

navigate social interactions and comply with rules and authority. Learning and behavioral

difficulties may pose significant challenges for teachers and interfere with student achievement.

If their trauma is not addressed, children with histories of complex trauma have difficulty

experiencing success in school.

2 Complex Trauma: Facts for Educators

September 2014

By the time she got to 10th grade, Renee was frequently truant from school and at risk for

dropping out altogether. Renee was now living in a group home, after multiple placements

in foster care were unsuccessful as a result of her unmanageable behavior. Renee

reported numerous physical complaints as well as recurring nightmares that made it

difficult for her to sleep. She and another girl had been caught cutting themselves in a

school bathroom. A teacher who had shown interest in Renee described her as "lost,"

without a sense of hope or plans for her future.

Renee’s case illustrates some of the common ways complex trauma affects learning. An

unstable upbringing, coupled with unsafe social interactions, has resulted in anticipated

rejection, abandonment, and hostility from others. Children who have experienced complex

trauma are often guarded and on “high alert,” making it difficult to interpret and respond to

social cues or focus in class. An unreliable support system and chronic physical complaints

(headaches, stomachaches) can also interfere with concentration and lead to inconsistent

academic performance and a higher rate of absences. Overall, children who experience

complex trauma are three times more likely to drop out of school than their peers. They also

may have:

Greater likelihood of performing below grade level, and lower GPAs

Higher rates of office referrals, suspensions, and expulsions

Decreased reading ability

Language and verbal processing deficits

Delays in expressive and receptive language

Greater tendency to be misclassified with developmental delays or referred for special

education services

Decreased ability to:

o Focus and concentrate

o Recall and remember

o Organize and process information

o Plan and problem-solve

By the time she entered middle school, Renee's problems had intensified. She and her

siblings had been returned to their mother’s care, but she was unresponsive to the efforts

of her 6th grade teacher to reach out to her. Renee confided in a staff member at an

afterschool program that she was being sexually abused by her stepfather. This disclosure

prompted a new Child Protective Services (CPS) investigation and temporary placement with

relatives. As a result, Renee missed a significant number of school days, and fell further

behind academically. Teachers noticed that Renee had few female friends and seemed to

behave in a sexually inappropriate manner with male classmates.

The National Child Traumatic Stress Network 3

www.NCTSN.org

CHALLENGING BEHAVIORS AND REACTIONS

When danger is experienced, whether real or perceived, an alarm in the brain goes off and

the “fight/flight/freeze” response is activated. Children with complex trauma have

overactive alarm systems. They may display intense reactions and have difficulty calming

down. Complex trauma causes the brain to interpret minor events as threatening, so these

students may not be able to realistically appraise danger or safety. They may also

misinterpret social cues, so that friendly joking seems hostile or threatening. These students

often exhibit challenging behaviors and reactions. They may be:

Non-compliant or oppositional

Anxious, worried, tense

Angry, agitated, or irritable

Withdrawn or depressed

Sleepy and tired in class (due to difficulty sleeping, bad dreams, or nightmares)

Uncomfortable with transitions and routine changes

Jumpy or easily startled by sudden sounds or movements, such as bells, sirens, doors

slamming, changes in lighting, or unanticipated physical contact

Self-destructive or self-injurious

Anticipating rejection and abandonment

Trauma Reminders

Trauma reminders make a student think about or “relive” a traumatic event from the past.

Trauma reminders can be places, sounds, smells, tastes, colors, textures, words, feelings,

and even other people. Students who have experienced complex trauma can be triggered by

trauma reminders many times a day, often without being aware of it. Being in a state of

“high alert” impedes their ability to learn. Teachers and school personnel can help students

by recognizing and anticipating trauma reminders and responding in a trauma-sensitive

manner. Some examples that can occur frequently in the school setting include:

Sounds or loud noises

Time of year, or time of day

Crowds

Being touched

Particular smells

Yelling or arguing

Thoughts, beliefs, or feelings (such as perceived blame, rejection, or hostility) can also

be reminders of past traumatic events. For example, “my teacher hates me,” or “I’m

always the one who gets in trouble.”


September 2014

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EDUCATORS

Teachers often deal with a wide range of student abilities and behaviors in their classrooms

and often are already employing positive strategies with those students. However, students

with complex trauma may feel especially threatened, vulnerable or rejected. They can

benefit greatly from relationships with supportive adults at school, including teachers,

support staff, and administrative staff, and it is crucial that all students have at least one

“go-to person” at school. The following observations can be helpful as you consider ways to

engage these children.

What can you do to support a student with complex trauma?

Understand what trauma looks like in the classroom and respond through compassion, not

discipline. Be trauma-informed when assessing children’s behaviors. Is the behavior you are

seeing as problematic, disruptive, or non-compliant actually caused by the child feeling

threatened, attacked, or reminded of a traumatic experience?

When appropriate, talk to parents and other professionals working with the child. Work together

to identify coping and calming strategies that could help a child enjoy and succeed in school.

Contribute to efforts to make school systems more trauma-informed, shifting disciplinary

practices from punitive to restorative/transformative. Help staff at all levels understand that

“problematic behaviors” serve a function for the student. Such behaviors often have proved

adaptive in traumatic environments, and as such, should be recognized as efforts to cope with

difficult circumstances. For example, aggressive or threatening body language decreases the

likelihood of being picked on or bullied. However these “coping mechanisms” can become

problematic once the student is in a safe environment in which the behavior is no longer needed.

Provide consistency and stability in your interactions with students. Children with extensive

trauma histories often have difficulty discriminating between

safe and unsafe environments and consequently behave in

ways that are not adaptive outside of the traumatic

environment. Teachers, administrators, and school

personnel can greatly foster a sense of safety and

predictability by remaining consistent in how they work with

these children.

Avoid labeling children negatively. Instead, help children

identify triggers resulting in stress reactions, and support

their use of coping skills. Children with complex trauma may

perceive themselves as “bad,” “crazy,” or having something

“wrong” with them. Assist them in understanding their

reactions in the context of their history and their

interpretation of the current event that is triggering the

reaction.

Be concrete in offering suggestions for managing emotions.

These children often lack the capacity for self-regulation.

They can’t just “calm down.” They may require assistance

with how to calm down.

The National Child Traumatic Stress Network 5

www.NCTSN.org

Modify assignments, tests, and homework for children. Providing more time for work, arranging

one-on-one instruction and support, and reducing the demand for verbal processing, attention,

memory, and other identified skill deficits will aid a child in experiencing success.

Create classroom activities that support a sense of community and safety. Foster pro-social

activities that allow children with complex trauma opportunities to contribute.

Provide educational activities that are interactive, and provide opportunities to connect with

peers and adults, so that there is a balance between individual assignments or handouts and

cooperative activities.

Take care of yourself

Remember, as an educator, you are on the

frontline. You may spend many hours each day

working with children and adolescents exposed

to complex trauma. You are in a unique position

to help. But you are also vulnerable to the stress

and challenges of working with children who

suffer the psychological and physical wounds of

complex trauma. Here are some ways to ensure

your own well-being and sustain your ability to

help your students.

Share your experience with those who know you firsthand: other teachers. It is impossible to

keep your human experiences separate from your work experiences. As a caring educator, you

bring yourself fully to your work and bring your work-self home. It is important to have strategies

that enable you to transition from work to home. One technique is to build communities of

support for yourself at school, and connect with those who will understand. Do this regularly, and

have your own “go-to person.”

Advocate for yourself with your loved one regarding the personal impact of working in

traumatized communities. You are truly working on the front lines five days a week.

If possible, spend time with youth who are not traumatized—this will provide you an opportunity

to remember that not all kids are traumatized.

Remember what brought you to education, and renew those initial motivations. What is your

personal mission statement?

Go to a quiet space and honestly assess what part trauma may have played in your personal

history. It is important to be aware of what gets “triggered” in us and how our trauma histories

are heightened by the students with whom we work.

Increase self-care. When working in chronically traumatized communities you need to accept the

benefits of self-care. Give yourself permission to have fun, exercise, have quiet time, eat well,

and laugh.


September 2014

Additional NCTSN Resources

Child Trauma Toolkit for Educators (2008)

o http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/Child_Trauma_Toolkit_Final.

pdf

o The Child Trauma Toolkit for Educators includes multiple resources designed for

school administrators, teachers, staff, and concerned parents and conveys basic

information about working with traumatized children in the school system, at all

grade levels.

Childhood Traumatic Grief Educational Materials - For School Personnel (2004)

o http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/schools_package.pdf

o This guide introduces key information (in brief and more in-depth formats) about

childhood traumatic grief relevant for school personnel, including how to identify

traumatic grief in students.

Facts on Traumatic Stress and Children with Developmental Disabilities (2004)

o http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/traumatic_stress_developm

ental_disabilities_final.pdf

o This fact sheet provides background on developmental disabilities, statistical

information regarding the incidence of trauma in this population, and suggestions for

modifying evaluation and treatment approaches.

Psychological First Aid for Schools

o http://www.nctsn.org/content/psychological-first-aid-schoolspfa

o PFA for Schools is an evidence-informed approach for assisting children,

adolescents, adults, and families in the aftermath of a school crisis, disaster, or mass

violence event.

Self-Care for Educators (Dealing with secondary traumatic stress) (2008)

o http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/CTTE_SelfCare.pdf

o The fact sheet offers tips to educators for recognizing and managing their own

secondary traumatic stress.

Traumatic Grief in Military Children: Information for Educators (2008)

o http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/military_grief_educators.pdf

o This brochure provides culturally competent information to help educators

understand how they can better serve military children suffering from traumatic grief.

Recommended Citation: National Child Traumatic Stress Network. (2014). Complex trauma: Facts for educators. Los

Angeles, CA, & Durham, NC: National Center for Child Traumatic Stress.

A Special Thanks to: Connie Black-Pond, M.A., Western Michigan University; Melissa Peace, LICSW; Cindy Hill-Ford, M.A.,

Catholic Charities of the East Bay; Mandy Habib, Psy.D., Adelphi University

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/Child_Trauma_Toolkit_Final.pdf

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/Child_Trauma_Toolkit_Final.pdf

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/schools_package.pdf

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/traumatic_stress_developmental_disabilities_final.pdf

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/traumatic_stress_developmental_disabilities_final.pdf

http://www.nctsn.org/content/psychological-first-aid-schoolspfa

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/CTTE_SelfCare.pdf

http://www.nctsnet.org/sites/default/files/assets/pdfs/military_grief_educators.pdf

cabinetreport.com

by Alisha Kirby

June 22, 2015(Calif.) Success of a novel court case out of Compton could extendservices for students with disabilities to pupils from high-crimeneighborhoods, but some experts question whether specialeducation is the right venue for addressing the debilitating effects ofliving in poverty and exposure to violence.

The lawsuit against Compton Unified School District will testwhether the symptoms of complex trauma qualify as a disabilityunder federal law and whether school districts would then berequired to provide special academic and mental health services.

The Essential Resource for Superintendents and the Cabinet about:reader?url=http://www.cabinetreport.com/special-education/expert...

1 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

Eric Rossen, director of professional development and standardsfor the National Association of School Psychologists, said manychildren that might be suffering from complex trauma could bebetter off seeking help outside the realm of special education.

“Addressing trauma should be viewed as part of an approach togeneral education and how schools interact with their students,families and the community rather than something that restssquarely on the shoulders of special education,” Rossen said. “(Thesuit) is actually viewing (complex trauma) as a disability that canonly be treated through intense instructional intervention, and that’snot necessarily the case.”

The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires thateach qualified student receive an Individualized Education Plan.The IEP is created by a committee that includes the child’s parents,one of his or her regular education teachers, a special educationteacher, an administrator and often a school psychologist as well.The plan is designed to meet the educational needs of that onechild and often includes special accommodations to account for thestudent’s disability.

At issue in the court case is whether students exposed to inner cityviolence have a disability caused by trauma, and whether thesymptoms meet certain criteria in one of the 14 categories underIDEA. Categories include autism, deafness and intellectualdisabilities.

“Though ‘trauma’ itself is not a recognized category of disabilityunder the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, for some


2 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

students, the symptoms may be co-occurring with those signifyingeligibility for services under a different category of disability, such asEmotional Disturbance or Other Health Impaired,” said SummerDalessandro, an attorney at Lozano Smith, a California-basededucation law firm not involved in this case.

Complex trauma typically involves repeated exposure to extremelystressful situations such as being a victim of or witness to physicalor sexual violence, witnessing violence in one’s neighborhood, orliving in poverty without reliable housing or food sources.

Students may show signs similar to those of someone sufferingfrom Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Lawrence Wissow, aprofessor of children’s mental health at Johns Hopkins BloombergSchool of Public Health, said in an interview. These can include achronically heightened sense of awareness, or rapidly becomingdefensive, irritable or sad in particular situations which don’t call forsuch reactions.

Studies show that students affected by complex trauma havedifficulties with memory, attention, comprehension, andinterpersonal relationships, as well as lower attendance rates,achievement, and academic engagement.

Although Rossen agrees that students suffering from the effects ofcomplex trauma could potentially fall under the categories ofEmotional Disturbance or Other Health Impaired, he said that thelikelihood of the district’s ability to provide intense interventionseffectively for so many students is low, especially given the limitedresources of special education programs.


3 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

Rather, he suggests what these students need is “a supportiveenvironment, an adult that can acknowledge and recognize whatthey’re going through, and a teacher who may not rely on punitivediscipline when their behavior is potentially related to theexperiences that they have outside of school.”

According to the lawsuit, the school district relied heavily onpunitive measures such as suspensions or expulsions, and did notprovide students accommodations to address their complextrauma.

One plaintiff, 17-year-old Peter P., said in the complaint that he wasabused as a young boy and was shuffled through various fosterhomes. He witnessed his best friend in middle school being shot todeath and has seen dozens of other people suffer the same fate.He was homeless this past spring and slept on the roof of theDominguez High School cafeteria, but was suspended andthreatened with arrest for trespassing if he tried to return to theschool, according to the lawsuit.

Despite having shown an ability to receive high grades, Peter saidhe has also been absent and failed classes because of depressionand anger, and alleges that his schools in Compton never offeredcounseling support.

Public Counsel, the pro bono law firm representing the students,said in a statement that the lawsuit seeks a remedy centered on theadoption of proven models meant to help students and educatorscope with trauma through:


4 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

Adequate mental health and counseling service for the highestneed students;

Trauma-informed training and support for all educators andschool staff;

Teaching children skills to cope with their anxiety and emotions;and

Implementing positive school discipline and restorativestrategies that keep children in school and create a safe andwelcoming environment.

Experts in childhood trauma believe that, regardless of whethertrauma is handled in general education or special education,addressing its impact on students, and training teachers how toidentify and support them, is incredibly important.

“I do believe that childhood trauma exposure and complex traumashould be addressed in schools - especially in those that serve highrates of children with complex trauma,” said Jason Lang, director ofdissemination and implementation at the Child Health andDevelopment Institute of Connecticut.

“It's a disservice to the teachers and educators serving these kidsnot to give them knowledge, skills and support for working from atrauma-informed perspective,” he said. “It's also an important partof taking care of the teachers and staff and preventing burnout andturnover.”


5 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

The case has not yet gone to trial.


6 of 6 8/26/2015 3:50 PM

Senate Bill No. 277

Passed the Senate June 29, 2015

Secretary of the Senate

Passed the Assembly June 25, 2015

Chief Clerk of the Assembly

This bill was received by the Governor this day

of , 2015, at o’clock m.

Private Secretary of the Governor

CHAPTER

An act to amend Sections 120325, 120335, 120370, and 120375of, to add Section 120338 to, and to repeal Section 120365 of, theHealth and Safety Code, relating to public health.

legislative counsel’s digest

SB 277, Pan. Public health: vaccinations.Existing law prohibits the governing authority of a school or

other institution from unconditionally admitting any person as apupil of any public or private elementary or secondary school,child care center, day nursery, nursery school, family day carehome, or development center, unless prior to his or her admissionto that institution he or she has been fully immunized againstvarious diseases, including measles, mumps, and pertussis, subjectto any specific age criteria. Existing law authorizes an exemptionfrom those provisions for medical reasons or because of personalbeliefs, if specified forms are submitted to the governing authority.Existing law requires the governing authority of a school or otherinstitution to require documentary proof of each entrant’simmunization status. Existing law authorizes the governingauthority of a school or other institution to temporarily exclude achild from the school or institution if the authority has good causeto believe that the child has been exposed to one of those diseases,as specified.

This bill would eliminate the exemption from existing specifiedimmunization requirements based upon personal beliefs, but wouldallow exemption from future immunization requirements deemedappropriate by the State Department of Public Health for eithermedical reasons or personal beliefs. The bill would exempt pupilsin a home-based private school and students enrolled in anindependent study program and who do not receiveclassroom-based instruction, pursuant to specified law from theprohibition described above. The bill would allow pupils who,prior to January 1, 2016, have a letter or affidavit on file at a privateor public elementary or secondary school, child day care center,day nursery, nursery school, family day care home, or developmentcenter stating beliefs opposed to immunization, to be enrolled in

92

— 2 —SB 277

any private or public elementary or secondary school, child daycare center, day nursery, nursery school, family day care home,or development center within the state until the pupil enrolls inthe next grade span, as defined. Except as under the circumstancesdescribed above, on and after July 1, 2016, the bill would prohibita governing authority from unconditionally admitting to any ofthose institutions for the first time or admitting or advancing anypupil to the 7th grade level, unless the pupil has been immunizedas required by the bill. The bill would specify that its provisionsdo not prohibit a pupil who qualifies for an individualizededucation program, pursuant to specified laws, from accessing anyspecial education and related services required by his or herindividualized education program. The bill would narrow theauthorization for temporary exclusion from a school or otherinstitution to make it applicable only to a child who has beenexposed to a specified disease and whose documentary proof ofimmunization status does not show proof of immunization againstone of the diseases described above. The bill would makeconforming changes to related provisions.

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 120325 of the Health and Safety Codeis amended to read:

120325. In enacting this chapter, but excluding Section 120380,and in enacting Sections 120400, 120405, 120410, and 120415, itis the intent of the Legislature to provide:

(a) A means for the eventual achievement of total immunizationof appropriate age groups against the following childhood diseases:

(1) Diphtheria.(2) Hepatitis B.(3) Haemophilus influenzae type b.(4) Measles.(5) Mumps.(6) Pertussis (whooping cough).(7) Poliomyelitis.(8) Rubella.(9) Tetanus.(10) Varicella (chickenpox).

92

SB 277— 3 —

(11) Any other disease deemed appropriate by the department,taking into consideration the recommendations of the AdvisoryCommittee on Immunization Practices of the United StatesDepartment of Health and Human Services, the American Academyof Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

(b) That the persons required to be immunized be allowed toobtain immunizations from whatever medical source they so desire,subject only to the condition that the immunization be performedin accordance with the regulations of the department and that arecord of the immunization is made in accordance with theregulations.

(c) Exemptions from immunization for medical reasons.(d) For the keeping of adequate records of immunization so that

health departments, schools, and other institutions, parents orguardians, and the persons immunized will be able to ascertainthat a child is fully or only partially immunized, and so thatappropriate public agencies will be able to ascertain theimmunization needs of groups of children in schools or otherinstitutions.

(e) Incentives to public health authorities to design innovativeand creative programs that will promote and achieve full and timelyimmunization of children.

SEC. 2. Section 120335 of the Health and Safety Code isamended to read:

120335. (a) As used in this chapter, “governing authority”means the governing board of each school district or the authorityof each other private or public institution responsible for theoperation and control of the institution or the principal oradministrator of each school or institution.

(b) The governing authority shall not unconditionally admit anyperson as a pupil of any private or public elementary or secondaryschool, child care center, day nursery, nursery school, family daycare home, or development center, unless, prior to his or her firstadmission to that institution, he or she has been fully immunized.The following are the diseases for which immunizations shall bedocumented:

(1) Diphtheria.(2) Haemophilus influenzae type b.(3) Measles.(4) Mumps.

92

— 4 —SB 277

(5) Pertussis (whooping cough).(6) Poliomyelitis.(7) Rubella.(8) Tetanus.(9) Hepatitis B.(10) Varicella (chickenpox).(11) Any other disease deemed appropriate by the department,

taking into consideration the recommendations of the AdvisoryCommittee on Immunization Practices of the United StatesDepartment of Health and Human Services, the American Academyof Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), full immunization againsthepatitis B shall not be a condition by which the governingauthority shall admit or advance any pupil to the 7th grade levelof any private or public elementary or secondary school.

(d) The governing authority shall not unconditionally admit oradvance any pupil to the 7th grade level of any private or publicelementary or secondary school unless the pupil has been fullyimmunized against pertussis, including all pertussis boostersappropriate for the pupil’s age.

(e) The department may specify the immunizing agents thatmay be utilized and the manner in which immunizations areadministered.

(f) This section does not apply to a pupil in a home-based privateschool or a pupil who is enrolled in an independent study programpursuant to Article 5.5 (commencing with Section 51745) ofChapter 5 of Part 28 of the Education Code and does not receiveclassroom-based instruction.

(g) (1) A pupil who, prior to January 1, 2016, submitted a letteror affidavit on file at a private or public elementary or secondaryschool, child day care center, day nursery, nursery school, familyday care home, or development center stating beliefs opposed toimmunization shall be allowed enrollment to any private or publicelementary or secondary school, child day care center, day nursery,nursery school, family day care home, or development centerwithin the state until the pupil enrolls in the next grade span.

(2) For purposes of this subdivision, “grade span” means eachof the following:

(A) Birth to preschool.

92

SB 277— 5 —

(B) Kindergarten and grades 1 to 6, inclusive, includingtransitional kindergarten.

(C) Grades 7 to 12, inclusive.(3) Except as provided in this subdivision, on and after July 1,

2016, the governing authority shall not unconditionally admit toany of those institutions specified in this subdivision for the firsttime, or admit or advance any pupil to 7th grade level, unless thepupil has been immunized for his or her age as required by thissection.

(h) This section does not prohibit a pupil who qualifies for anindividualized education program, pursuant to federal law andSection 56026 of the Education Code, from accessing any specialeducation and related services required by his or her individualizededucation program.

SEC. 3. Section 120338 is added to the Health and Safety Code,to read:

120338. Notwithstanding Sections 120325 and 120335, anyimmunizations deemed appropriate by the department pursuant toparagraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 120325 or paragraph(11) of subdivision (b) of Section 120335, may be mandated beforea pupil’s first admission to any private or public elementary orsecondary school, child care center, day nursery, nursery school,family day care home, or development center, only if exemptionsare allowed for both medical reasons and personal beliefs.

SEC. 4. Section 120365 of the Health and Safety Code isrepealed.


120370. (a) If the parent or guardian files with the governingauthority a written statement by a licensed physician to the effectthat the physical condition of the child is such, or medicalcircumstances relating to the child are such, that immunization isnot considered safe, indicating the specific nature and probableduration of the medical condition or circumstances, including, butnot limited to, family medical history, for which the physiciandoes not recommend immunization, that child shall be exemptfrom the requirements of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section120325, but excluding Section 120380) and Sections 120400,120405, 120410, and 120415 to the extent indicated by thephysician’s statement.

92

— 6 —SB 277

(b) If there is good cause to believe that a child has been exposedto a disease listed in subdivision (b) of Section 120335 and his orher documentary proof of immunization status does not show proofof immunization against that disease, that child may be temporarilyexcluded from the school or institution until the local health officeris satisfied that the child is no longer at risk of developing ortransmitting the disease.


120375. (a) The governing authority of each school orinstitution included in Section 120335 shall require documentaryproof of each entrant’s immunization status. The governingauthority shall record the immunizations of each new entrant inthe entrant’s permanent enrollment and scholarship record on aform provided by the department. The immunization record ofeach new entrant admitted conditionally shall be reviewedperiodically by the governing authority to ensure that within thetime periods designated by regulation of the department he or shehas been fully immunized against all of the diseases listed inSection 120335, and immunizations received subsequent to entryshall be added to the pupil’s immunization record.

(b) The governing authority of each school or institutionincluded in Section 120335 shall prohibit from further attendanceany pupil admitted conditionally who failed to obtain the requiredimmunizations within the time limits allowed in the regulationsof the department, unless the pupil is exempted under Section120370, until that pupil has been fully immunized against all ofthe diseases listed in Section 120335.

(c) The governing authority shall file a written report on theimmunization status of new entrants to the school or institutionunder their jurisdiction with the department and the local healthdepartment at times and on forms prescribed by the department.As provided in paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 49076of the Education Code, the local health department shall haveaccess to the complete health information as it relates toimmunization of each student in the schools or other institutionslisted in Section 120335 in order to determine immunizationdeficiencies.

(d) The governing authority shall cooperate with the countyhealth officer in carrying out programs for the immunization of

92

SB 277— 7 —

persons applying for admission to any school or institution underits jurisdiction. The governing board of any school district mayuse funds, property, and personnel of the district for that purpose.The governing authority of any school or other institution maypermit any licensed physician or any qualified registered nurse asprovided in Section 2727.3 of the Business and Professions Codeto administer immunizing agents to any person seeking admissionto any school or institution under its jurisdiction.

92

— 8 —SB 277

Approved , 2015

Governor

CODED

CORRESPONDENCE

DATE: June 29, 2015

NUMBER: 15-05

TO: All Individuals and Groups Interested in the Activities of the Commission on Teacher Credentialing

FROM: Mary Vixie Sandy Executive Director Commission on Teacher Credentialing

SUBJECT: Variable Term Waiver for the Speech-Language Pathology Services Credential

Summary: The Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Commission) adopted new criteria for the initial issuance and reissuance of a Variable Term Waiver (VTW) for the Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) Services Credential and authorized staff to approve or deny VTWs based on the adopted criteria. The criteria became effective on January 1, 2015. Required criteria for initial issuance includes:

Hold Bachelor’s degree in Speech-Language Pathology or hold a Multiple Subject Teaching Credential or an Education Specialist Credential; and

Enrollment in California or out-of-state program.

Required criteria for reissuance includes:

Enrollment in California or out-of-state program; and

Verify progress towards issuance of credential; and

No more than five waivers with another two possible if specific criteria are met.

Key Provisions: Requirements for Initial Issuance 1. For the initial issuance of a VTW for the SLP Services Credential individuals must verify one of the following:

a. Bachelor’s degree from a regionally-accredited college or university in Speech-Language Pathology, Communicative Disorder, or a closely aligned field. Examples of closely aligned fields are listed in Appendix A.; or

Coded Correspondence 15-05: Variable Term Waiver for the SLP Services Credential page 2

Commission on Teacher Credentialing 1900 Capitol Avenue Sacramento, CA 95811

b. A valid California Multiple Subject Teaching Credential, Education Specialist Instruction Credential, or older equivalent credential.

2. Program Enrollment – individuals must verify one of the following:

a. Enrollment in a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program with an original letter on official letterhead from the Commission approved SLP program verifying program enrollment; or

b. Enrollment in an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program, with an original letter on official letterhead from the out-of-state ASHA program; or

c. Verify an inability to enroll in a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or an out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program and confirm that all requirements for entry are met by one of the following methods:

i. A verification notice from the college or university of an inability to enroll in a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program (i.e., within 100 miles or available online) due specifically to limitations of space or due to a mismatch between the requested initial employment date and the program enrollment date; or

ii. Confirmation from a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or an out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program that all minimum admission requirements were met by the applicant but enrollment was denied due to space limitations; or

iii. Documentation submitted by the employing agency that verifies the applicant met all minimum admission requirements for a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program and verification of application and denial by the program.

d. For holders of a valid Multiple Subject Teaching or Education Specialist Instruction Credential:

i. Submit a verification of intent to enroll in a minimum of six semester units of coursework in Speech‐Language Pathology or Communicative Disorders coursework appropriate for admission to a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program.

Please note: applicants who verify Program Enrollment through option a or b will not be held for requirement 1. Requirements for Reissuance Individuals must demonstrate adequate progress toward earning the SLP Services Credential for reissuance of the VTW by one of the following:

a. Completing a minimum of six semester units toward completion of a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program; or



b. Completing a minimum of six semester units toward completion of an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program; or

c. For individuals who hold a valid Multiple Subject Teaching or Education Specialist Instruction Credential:

i. Complete a minimum of six semester units of coursework in Speech‐Language Pathology or Communicative Disorders necessary for admission to a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or out‐of-state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program; or

d. Verify an inability to enroll in a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or an out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program and confirm that all requirements for entry are met by one of the following methods:

i. A verification notice from the college or university of an inability to enroll in a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program (i.e., within 100 miles or available online) due specifically to limitations of space or due to a mismatch between the requested initial employment date and the program enrollment date; or

ii. Confirmation from a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program that all minimum admission requirements were met by the applicant but enrollment was denied due to space limitations; or

iii. Documentation submitted by the employing agency that verifies the applicant met all minimum admission requirements for a Commission‐approved SLP Services Credential program or an out‐of‐state ASHA‐accredited graduate level SLP program and verification of application and denial by the program.

Number of Reissuances The number of VTWs for the SLP Services Credential will be limited to five total issuances (initial issuance and four reissuances), with the option for an employing agency to request up to two more reissuances for the following specific circumstances:

The individual holds a valid Multiple Subject Teaching Credential or Education Specialist Instruction Credential and must verify active enrollment in a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or an out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program. A minimum of six semester units in the approved program must be completed for each of the two subsequent reissuances; or

The individual qualified for one or more reissuances based on a valid medical appeal as outlined in Credential Leaflet AL-3 and submits a letter verifying active enrollment in a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential Program or an out-of-state ASHA accredited graduate level SLP program; or

An individual who exceeded four or more issuances of the VTW for the SLP Services Credential prior to January 1, 2015 must submit a letter verifying active enrollment and



progress in either a Commission-approved SLP Services Credential program or an out-of-state ASHA-accredited graduate level SLP program.

Important Dates: The Commission adopted the initial SLP VTW criteria with an effective date of January 1, 2015. Expanded criteria were adopted at the February 2015 meeting. Background: A credential waiver is an employment option available to local education agencies when there is a shortage of credentialed personnel. The Commission has had the responsibility for granting credential waivers since July 1994. A credential waiver is the option of last resort for employing agencies to legally assign an individual who is not appropriately credentialed. The VTW allows the employing agency to fill the assignment while searching for a fully credentialed educator and gives the waiver holder additional time to complete the requirements for the associated credential. The VTW is restricted to service with the local education agency granting the waiver and is generally issued for one school year with specific criteria set for the reissuance of a subsequent waiver. While the VTW for the SLP Services Credential is restricted to service with the employing agency that requested the waiver, the authorization of the SLP VTW is the same as the SLP Services Credential. The Commission approved criteria to strengthen the requirements for the initial issuance and reissuance of the VTW for the SLP Services Credential. The adopted criteria will increase assurance that individuals in the schools who hold VTWs for the SLP Services Credential meet appropriate minimum standards of competency to provide SLP services and are on the preparation pathway towards becoming fully credentialed.

Source: Title 5, California Code of Regulations, sections 80121, 80122, 80124 and 80125 pertaining to Variable Term Waivers References: Waiver Requests Guidebook, Edition 2014: http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/manuals-handbooks/WaiverHandbook.pdf

List of Commission-approved SLP program: http://cig.ctc.ca.gov/cig/CTC_apm/ORESS_slp_lsh.php

ASHA-accredited programs: www.asha.org/Academic/accreditation/CAA-Accredited-Programs

Speech‐Language Pathology Services Credential Information leaflet CL-879: http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/leaflets/cl879.pdf

Extensions by Appeal for Credentials and Permits Information leaflet AL-3: http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/leaflets/al3.pdf

http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/manuals-handbooks/WaiverHandbook.pdf

http://cig.ctc.ca.gov/cig/CTC_apm/ORESS_slp_lsh.php

http://www.asha.org/Academic/accreditation/CAA-Accredited-Programs

http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/leaflets/cl879.pdf

http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/leaflets/al3.pdf



Contact Information: Questions concerning Variable Term Waivers: Email [email protected]. Credentialing questions can be directed to the Commission’s Information Services Unit by Email at [email protected], or by telephone to (916) 322-4974 Monday through Friday from 12:30 pm to 4:30 pm.

mailto:[email protected]




Appendix A

Examples of Closely Aligned Fields Commission adopted criteria state that a waiver applicant must hold a Bachelor’s degree from a regionally-accredited college or university in Speech-Language Pathology, Communicative Disorder, or a closely aligned field. The information below provides examples of acceptable closely aligned fields but is not meant to be all inclusive.

Communication and Learning Disorders Speech and Language Disabilities

Communication Disorders

Speech-Language Sciences

Communication Sciences and Disorders

Speech-Language Sciences and Disorders

Language, Speech, and Hearing

Speech Pathology

Speech and Hearing

Speech Pathology and Audiology

Speech and Hearing Sciences

Speech Therapy

Speech Language and Hearing Science Speech Sciences


Use of People-First Language for Students with Disabilities

WHEREAS, All students deserve to be treated with dignity and respect; and

WHEREAS, More than 705,000 students with disabilities receive special education services in California, comprising about ten percent of the state’s public school enrollment; and

WHEREAS, Students with disabilities are sons, daughters, sisters, brothers, friends, and neighbors; and

WHEREAS, The contributions of students with disabilities enrich our communities as they live, learn and share their lives; and

WHEREAS, The language used to refer to students with disabilities has a profound impact in shaping beliefs and attitudes about these students, driving policies and laws, influencing our feelings and decisions, and affecting students’ daily lives; and

WHEREAS, Old, inaccurate, and inappropriate descriptors about students with disabilities perpetuate negative stereotypes and attitudinal barriers; and

WHEREAS, When we identify or describe students with disabilities primarily in terms of their disability or mental diagnosis, we devalue and stigmatize them; and

WHEREAS, Using thoughtful terminology can foster positive attitudes about students with disabilities; and

WHEREAS, One of the major improvements in communicating verbally or in writing with or about students with disabilities is People-First Language, which places the person ahead of his or her disability; and

WHEREAS, People-First Language is an objective form of communication that eliminates generalizations and stereotypes by focusing on the person rather than the disability; and

WHEREAS, For example we do not refer to a child with cancer as “a cancerous child,” and similarly, we should not refer to a child with autism as an “autistic child” or a child with epilepsy as “an epileptic,” and

WHEREAS, A recent report of the Statewide Special Education Task Force called for a unified, inclusive educational system that supports all students based on individual needs; and

California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307-1219

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org

WHEREAS, The manner in which written and verbal policies and communications refer to students with disabilities can undermine this important state educational goal; and

WHEREAS, The Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) California Association of Health and Education Linked Professions (CAHELP) Joint Powers Authority (JPA) recognizes the necessity of a more respectful and humanistic view of students with disabilities; now, therefore, be it

Resolved and affirmed by the Governing Council of the Desert/Mountain CAHELP JPA, that state policies and procedures should utilize People-First Terminology to the greatest extent possible, especially those utilized by state and local educational agencies; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of the Desert/Mountain CAHELP JPA Governance Council transmit copies of this resolution to local legislators for appropriate distribution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED ON September 11, 2015, by the following votes:

AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO

I, Jenae Holtz, Secretary of the Desert/Mountain CAHELP JP Governance Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Council at a regularly called and conducted meeting held on said date.

Jenae Holtz Desert/Mountain CAHELP JPA

Using People-First Language

Educators have great influence to impact the actions, attitudes, and language of their students, colleagues, and families. Words are powerful and can foster positive images and abilities or perpetuate negative connota-tions. Being aware of and using People-First Language is a simple way to define a stu-dent’s value and potential.

People-First LanguagePeople-First Language is defined as choosing words about people with disa-bilities that define the person first, not the disability. It is important to define who the person “is” before defining what disability the person “may have.” Language is power-ful and our words impact how others are viewed. For example, when we refer to “a student who receives special education ser-vices” in preference to “a special education student,” we maximize the potential of the student while minimizing the impact of the disability.

Presume Competence*As teachers, it is our responsibility to presume the competence of all students in our classrooms. Presuming competence means assuming all individuals:

• Are intellectually complex,

• Desire to have meaningful inter-actions and opportunities, and

• Have the right to learn rigorous academic content, despite communicating differently or having other support needs.

The belief that all students are competent to learn age-appropriate, general educa-tion curriculum content aligned to the grade-level standards in the general edu-cation classroom is inherent in the “presume competence” paradigm. This paradigm views students with disabilities through the lens of ability. Presuming competence for students with disabilities increases the expectations for academic and social achievement by including them in opportunities to learn what other stu-dents their age are learning. When teachers “presume competence,” it is synonymous with the concept of “least dangerous assumption.” Anne Donnellan wrote that, “The criterion of least danger-ous assumption holds that in the absence of conclusive data, educational decisions ought to be based on assumptions which, if incorrect, will have the least dangerous effect on the likelihood that students will be able to function independently as adults.” She concluded that, “We should assume that poor performance is due to instructional inadequacy rather than to student deficits.”

If we presume competence in all students, we ensure multiple opportunities for access, participation, and progress in grade level general education curriculum.

“Words differently arranged have a different meaning, and meanings differently arranged have a different effect.”

Blaise Pascal

* Adapted from Donnellan, A.M. (1984). The Criterion of the Least Dangerous Assumption. Behavioral Disorders, v9, n2 (pp.141-50).

Choose to Use People-First Language

Choosing to use People-First Language promotes presuming competence for all students. It is only important to refer to a student’s disability if it is relevant to the conversation or situation. This ensures that the emphasis is placed on the student, not the disability. Many labels used in our society have negative connotations and can be misleading. Using labels contributes to negative stereotypes and devalues the person one attempts to describe. Disability is just another label.

People who have disabilities are present in every aspect of society: moms and dads, sons and

daughters, employees and employers, friends and neighbors, scientists and movie stars, leaders and followers, teachers and students . . . they are people. Most importantly, they are people first.

Language is Power

Using People-First Language provides us with the opportunity to view all students through the lens of their abilities. Words really do matter. Below are phrases that promote People-First Language, and phrases that we should avoid.

People-First Language Language to Avoid

student(s) who receive special education services special education student(s); the IEP kids

student who uses a wheelchair wheel-chair bound

student with an intellectual disability mentally retarded

student with a learning disability dyslexic; LD kid

student with a disability crippled, physically challenged, handicapped

student with cerebral palsy person who suffers from cerebral palsy

student who is deaf or hearing impaired deaf kid

People-First Language Language to Avoid

A the epileptic

B special needs kids

C the emotional support kid

You Can Make a Difference!

Restate the phrases below to reflect People-First Language.

Suggested responses can be found at the bottom of page 3.

General Guidelines for Modeling People-First Language

• Refer to a person’s disability only if it is relevant to the conversation.

• Use the term “disability” not “handicap” when referring to a person’s disability.

• Use positive language when describing a person’s disability to eliminate stereotypes. Words such as “suffers from, a victim of, or afflicted with” portray sympathy or pity toward people with disabilities.

• Use language such as a “person without a disability” if necessary to make comparisons. Words such as “normal, regular, or able-bodied” used to describe people without disabilities imply that people with disabilities are of lesser value.

• Define all people by the multiple characteristics they possess.

• Use the “people” word first (e.g., the girl who has, the boy with, the student who)

• Create a caring classroom commu-nity by modeling People-First Language for your students and by guiding your students to use People-First Language throughout all interactions.

Disability Etiquette

Disability etiquette is a term that is used to describe a heightened awareness of the impact our actions and words may have on people with and without a disability. Actions such as leaning on a student’s wheelchair, talking too close or not at eye level, antici-pating every need and providing support even when it is not warranted or requested, are behaviors that can be considered intru-sive and uncomfortable for a student with a disability.

Instead, consider the following:

• Respect personal space.

• Use language that is consistent with the age of your student.

• Talk to the student at his or her eye level.

• Ask questions to determine whether the student needs assistance. This provides the student with opportunities for choice and independence.

• Monitor your volume and tone to match the situation and the student. Talking loudly or too slowly is unnecessary in most situations.

People-First Language can be a practice that relates

to all students. It puts the person first before any defin-

ing quality or quantification. It allows one to see the

person first, and any defining characteristics second.

People are made up of a variety of characteristics; one

alone doesn’t define us. We are not the “blonde kid,” the

“soccer boy,” or the “violin girl,” but we are people who

happen to have blonde hair, play soccer, or have mas-

tered the violin. Being defined as a label is stigmatizing,

limiting, and damaging in how we are perceived by

others. Using People-First Language in our classrooms

and school community with all students gives us the

opportunity to value and celebrate the student first.

Suggested Responses from page 2.

A student with epilepsy

B students who receive special education services

C student who receives emotional support services

11/10

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Thomas E. GluckActing Secretary

Amy C. MortonDeputy Secretary,

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education

John J. TommasiniDirector, Bureau of Special Education

Patricia HozellaAssistant Director, Bureau of Special Education

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

Edward G. Rendell Governor

4

1

7

8

8

4

3

Workgroups/Committees

Systems Change

Speech/Language/Hearing

SecondaryTransition/Vocational

Positive BehaviorSupport/Health

Parent Support

Legal

Instructional Strategies

Autism

Assistive Technology

Assessment

D/M CHARTER SELPA PROFESSIONAL LEARNING PARTICIPATION SUMMARYJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS

35 YEAR TO DATE PARTICIPANTS

Total Participants by Content Area On-Site Trainings Regional Trainings

1Workgroups/Committees

Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

DESERT TRAILS PREP ACADEMYJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS1 YEAR TO DATE PARTICIPANT


3

1

7

8

8

4

3


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

ENCORE JUNIOR/SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



30

13

117

50

356

215

1,928

69

519

860

325

8

70


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

D/M SELPA PROFESSIONAL LEARNING PARTICIPATION SUMMARYJUNE 2015‐ 43 PARTICIPANTS

4,517 YEAR TO DATE PARTICIPANTS


4

9

15

2

9

15

6

4


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

ACADEMY FOR ACADEMIC EXCELLENCEJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



1

4

1

6

1

117

7

41

30

31

15


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

ADELANTO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 1 PARTICIPANT



1

3

41

35

71

7

34

47

9

1


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

APPLE VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 1 PARTICIPANT



2

24

2

20

6


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

BAKER VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



1

2

9

2

94

29

13

1

10


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

BARSTOW UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 1 PARTICIPANT



4

27

4

78

3

15

15

17

4


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

BEAR VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



1

4

7

3

1

16

12

2


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

DESERT/MOUNTAIN OPERATIONSJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



50

3

11

2

34

6

19

34

43


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

DESERT/MOUNTAIN SELPAJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



2

8

1

62

1

15

9

2


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

DESERT MOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S CENTERJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



3

21

8

5

10

3

1


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

EXCELSIOR CHARTER SCHOOLSJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



2

2

7


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

HEALTH SCIENCES HIGH SCHOOL AND MIDDLE COLLEGEJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



1

1

40

1

7

8

1


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

HELENDALE SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



4

9

68

42

285

5

64

193

73

8


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

HESPERIA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 4 PARTICIPANTS



3

13

8

10

58

6


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

HIGH TECH HIGHJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



3

1

7

6

12

2

2

63


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

LUCERNE VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



3

8

1

16

1

8

5


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

NEEDLES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



2

9

4


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

NORTON SPACE & AERONAUTICS ACADEMYJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



6

3

12

64

10

7

4

2


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

ORO GRANDE SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



2

66

1

53

13

24

22

5

6


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLSJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



1

2

1

7

174

4

24

56


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

SILVER VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 0 PARTICIPANTS



13

3

10

16

12

159

1

27

115

5


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

SNOWLINE JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 13 PARTICIPANTS



5

4

5

2

11

3

1


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

TRONA JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 5 PARTICIPANTS



1

2

10

71

2

301

12

89

106

39

5


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

VICTOR ELEMENATRY SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 1 PARTICIPANT



17

7

10

45

305

4

67

18

70

1

3


Systems Change




Parent Support

Legal


Autism


Assessment

VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTJUNE 2015‐ 17 PARTICIPANTS



Just visit:and fill out the new form on the web page.

Our staff will receive your request within a few moments and you will receive a submission confirmation via email.

Filling out a request for anon-site training is even easier!

dmselpa.org/onsite

Check out our newOn-Site Request Form!

INTRODUCTION TO RESTORATIVE PRACTICES Description: Using Restorative Practices as prevention and intervention tools will greatly enhance your schools Interconnected Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (IMTSS). According to the International Institute for Restorative Practices, this eight-hour workshop will help you learn practical strategies to build strong, healthy relationships with students, families, clients, employees and colleagues. Participants will gain a better understanding of the basic principles of Restorative Practices and will experience practicing the skills needed to start using these practices immediately. Practices include using Affective Statements, Affective Questions, Small Impromptu Conferences, Group or Circle Strategies, and brief discussion about the Formal Conference. This workshop is part one of a series of two and is a pre-requisite for taking part two, Using Circles Effectively.

Presented By: Kami Murphy, PBIS Coordinator

Date: September 8, 2015

Registration Time: 8:00 a.m.

Training Time: 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.

Cost: $25.00 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Intended Audience: Administrators, general and special education teachers, school psychologists, counselors, intervention specialists, and others who actively work with students.

Location: Desert/Mountain Educational Service Center, 17800 Hwy 18, Apple Valley, CA 92307

Registration: To ensure that we provide enough materials for everyone please register online at: http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-101817 The registration deadline is September 3, 2015. For additional registration information, please contact [email protected]. For additional information regarding training content, please contact [email protected]. There are no refunds for no-shows or cancellations after the registration deadline.

Special Accommodations: Please submit any special accommodation requests at least fifteen working days prior to the training by notating your request when registering at: http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-101817

Desert / Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307-1219

P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org

http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-101817


WOODCOCK JOHNSON IV ACHIEVEMENT TRAINING (HALF DAY SESSIONS) Description: The Woodcock-Johnson IV is a theoretical, structural, and interpretive revision of the Woodcock-Johnson III. It is designed as a “Training of Trainers” for those individuals who are capable of training others in their district. This training is a half-day workshop that provides more administration and interpretive options for the newest version of this assessment.

Presented By: Renee Garcia, Program Specialist

Date: September 30, 2015

Registration Time: Morning Session: 8:00 – 8:30 a.m. /Afternoon Session: 12:30 – 1:00 p.m.

Training Time: Morning Session: 8:30 – 11:30 a.m. /Afternoon Session: 1:00 – 4:00 p.m.

Cost: There is no cost associated with this event. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Intended Audience: Special education teachers & school psychologists

Location: Victor Elementary District Office located at 12219 2nd Ave. Victorville, CA 92395

Registration: To ensure that we provide enough materials for everyone please register online at: http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100273 for the morning session or http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100274 for the afternoon session. The registration deadline is September 16, 2015. For additional registration information, please contact [email protected], (760) 955-3592. For additional information regarding training content, please contact [email protected], (760) 955-3586. There are no refunds for no-shows or cancellations after the registration deadline.

Special Accommodations: Please submit any special accommodation requests at least fifteen working days prior to the training by notating your request when registering at: http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100273 or http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100274.


P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org

http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100273






WOODCOCK JOHNSON IV ACHIEVEMENT TRAINING (HALF DAY SESSIONS) Description: The Woodcock-Johnson IV is a theoretical, structural, and interpretive revision of the Woodcock-Johnson III. It is designed as a “Training of Trainers” for those individuals who are capable of training others in their district. This training is a half-day workshop that provides more administration and interpretive options for the newest version of this assessment.

Presented By: Renee Garcia, Program Specialist

Date: October 30, 2015

Registration Time: Morning Session: 8:00 – 8:30 a.m. /Afternoon Session: 12:30 – 1:00 p.m.

Training Time: Morning Session: 8:30 – 11:30 a.m. /Afternoon Session: 1:00 – 4:00 p.m.

Cost: There is no cost associated with this event. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Intended Audience: Special education teachers & school psychologists

Location: Desert Mountain Educational Service Center, 17800 Highway 18, Apple Valley, CA 92307.

Registration: To ensure that we provide enough materials for everyone please register online at: http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100936 for the morning session or http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100939 for the afternoon session. The registration deadline is October 16, 2015. For additional registration information, please contact [email protected], (760) 955-3592. For additional information regarding training content, please contact [email protected], (760) 955-3586. There are no refunds for no-shows or cancellations after the registration deadline.

Special Accommodations: Please submit any special accommodation requests at least fifteen working days prior to the training by notating your request when registering at: http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100936 or http://oms.sbcss.k12.ca.us/52-100939.


P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org







The California Department of Education (CDE) is extending a professional learning opportunity to K-12 teachers to increase their understanding of classroom formative assessment practices through participation in an online course called Formative Assessment Insights. It was developed by nationally respected experts in formative assessment, Margaret Heritage and Nancy Gerzon, and WestEd, and is funded by the Hewlett Foundation. There is no charge for educators to participate.The purpose of the Formative Assessment Insights on-line course is to help teachers become skillful users of formative assessment in their classrooms in the context of college and career readiness.

The course consists of five modules for teachers to participate in over six months, from September 2015 through February 2016. For the most part, teachers may participate online at times convenient to them. Teachers should expect to spend approximately two hours per week for a total of 40 hours over the six months. Teachers will participate in teams of six to eight teachers, to share experiences as well as give and receive feedback on their respective formative assessment implementations. (If desired, teachers may receive course credit.) A course syllabus is attached and provides additional information about the course and its timeline.

This online application for this course is available through the link below and will remain open through August 31, 2015.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/WD7WSPL

Please direct questions to Phyllis Hallam in the CDE Professional Learning Support Division at 916-323-4630 or [email protected].

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/WD7WSPL


ONLINE COURSE SYLLABUS

Introduction The purpose of this course is to increase participants’ understanding of formative assessment and help them become skillful users of formative assessment their classrooms in the context of College and Career Ready Standards (CCRS). The course is aimed at classroom teachers (although coaches will be eligible to participate) and will be offered beginning September 2015 and concluding in February 2016. The online course represents approximately 40 hours of professional learning over the five-month time period. Each module will entail approximately eight hours of participant engagement or two hours a week on average. Participants will be eligible for course credit upon completing all the requirements of the course, including a 1500 word paper reflection on what they learned and how their learning has impacted their practice. The paper will be graded as pass/fail. Margaret Heritage, Senior Scientist, WestEd, will be the instructor of record for the course. Goals and Objectives The goals of the course are to:

1. Deepen participants’ knowledge of CCRS; 2. Develop participants’ knowledge and skills in moving from standards to lesson learning

goals; 3. Develop participants’ knowledge and skills in implementing formative assessment

practices in support of deeper learning; 4. Develop participants’ skills in involving students in the learning and assessment

processes; 5. Increase participants’ knowledge about the role of structures and expectations in the

classroom that support formative assessment. As a result of engaging in this course, participants will be able to:

1. Set immediate learning goals for students derived from their analysis of the intermediate steps (building blocks) that students will take as they increase their learning from the end of one grade level’s standards to the end of the next;

2. Assist students to understand the goals being aimed for and provide them with a clear sense of how they will know if they are meeting the goal;

3. Be intentional about how they are going to collect evidence of students’ developing understanding during the lesson;

4. Be more responsive to students based on the evidence, ensuring that students remain on track to meet desired goals. Importantly, they will not adopt a one-size-fits-all approach

to learning, but will to be responsive to individuals within the context of the classroom as a whole;

5. Provide the kind of feedback based on evidence that students can use to support their own learning;

6. Give students time to act on the feedback, which over time can lead to their building a repertoire of learning strategies they can ultimately employ themselves;

7. Engage students in the assessment/learning process through peer and self-assessment; 8. Organize their classrooms so that there are clear structures to support discourse practices

(a key means to learning for students and a source of evidence for teachers), collaboration, individual and group responsibility and accountability.

Course Design The online course is comprised of five modules. These modules are asynchronous so that participants can engage in course content at their convenience. Each module consists of:

• Introductory Inquiry: presentation and guided analysis via video of an aspect of formative assessment;

• Guided Practice: analysis of video and vignettes using protocols; • Independent Implementation: Participants make plans for how to implement what they

have learned in their classrooms, implement and then revise as a result of experience. Course participants will be required to form within-state teams (between 5-8 teachers per team) to share experiences as well as give and receive feedback on their respective formative assessment implementations. Each team will have a group workspace within the learning environment where members can share reflections and questions about their implementation of formative assessment. There are three synchronous webinar events throughout the course that elaborate the content of the modules.

Course Outline

Date Objectives Content 9/15 1. Understand the process of

formative assessment, its purpose, and the classroom conditions to support the process

2. Gain an understanding of the theoretical and research base for formative assessment

3. Consider pedagogical practices in support of learning in the context of CCRS

• Overview of the process of formative assessment

• Considerations in creating a classroom culture for formative assessment

• Research/theoretical base for formative assessment

• Review and reflect on resource Fundamentals of Learning, created by the Center for Standards and Assessment Implementation

10/15 1. Gain an understanding of how to

plan lessons with formative assessment from standards

2. Understand the role of learning goals and success criteria in formative assessment

3. Develop skills in creating learning goals and success criteria

• Review and reflect on resource Planning Lessons with Formative Assessment, created by the Center for Standards and Assessment Implementation

• The purpose of learning goals and success criteria

• Practice creating and implementing learning goals and success criteria

11/15 1. Understand how evidence of learning can be intentionally gathered during the course of teaching and learning

2. Understand the criteria for quality evidence

3. Develop skills in planning for evidence gathering aligned to learning goals and success criteria and interpreting evidence

• Strategies for obtaining evidence of learning aligned to learning goals and success criteria as part of instruction

• Criteria for obtaining quality evidence • Practice planning for, and obtaining evidence

of, student learning during instruction • Practice interpreting evidence of learning

1/16 1. Understand the purpose of contingent pedagogy in formative assessment

2. Understand the characteristics of effective feedback

3. Practice evaluating the quality of contingent pedagogy, including feedback

• Responding contingently to evidence of learning • Research on effective feedback • Evaluating the quality of contingent pedagogy

and feedback • Practice planning for contingent pedagogy • Practice providing feedback

2/16 1. Understand the student role in formative assessment

2. Gain an understanding of student metacognition, motivation and self-regulation in relation to formative assessment

3. Consider strategies to involve students in the assessment process

• Why involve students in assessment • 21st century skills of metacognition and self-

regulation • Teaching students to be metacognitive and self-

regulated • Teaching students to provide peer feedback

Course Bibliography This bibliography will be made available to course participants. Those taking the course for credit will be required to read at least two papers and include reference to them in their course paper. Black, P. J. & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappa, 80,139-148. Hattie, J., & Timperely, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112. Heritage, M. (October, 2007) Formative assessment: what teachers need to know and do. Phi Delta Kappan. 89 (2) 140-146.

Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Classroom assessment: Minute by minute, day by day. Educational Leadership, 63 (3), 18-26.

Shepard, L.A. (2005). Linking Formative Assessment to Scaffolding. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 66-71.

1 of 13

REGIONAL ASSESSMENT NETWORK Thursday, July 23, 2015

Sacramento, CA

This meeting summary is intended for use by Regional Assessment Network (RAN) members to disseminate information within their region in order to strengthen communications and build a greater understanding of and support for state assessment and accountability. All presenters listed are California Department of Education (CDE) staff, unless otherwise noted.

MEETING SUMMARY

Division Update (Lily Roberts)

New CAASPP Contract The new contract for the development and administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP) was awarded to the Educational Testing Service (ETS) in May 2015. The CDE held four days of orientation meetings during mid-July to discuss with ETS all of the tasks needing to be accomplished over the next three years. The contract addresses assessments within the CAASPP System as well as additional assessments to be determined by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SSPI) and the State Board of Education (SBE):

• Smarter Balanced Summative Assessments, English language-arts/literacy (ELA) and mathematics

• Smarter Balanced Interim Assessments, ELA and mathematics • California Standardized Tests (CST)/California Modified Assessment (CMA)/California

Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) for Science • California Alternate Assessments (CAA) (successor to CAPA) in ELA and mathematics • Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) Assessments (successor to

CST/CMA/CAPA) • Standards-based Tests in Spanish (STS) – Reading Language Arts Assessments • Primary Language Assessments (successor to STS) • Expansion assessments

Education Code (EC) Section 60640 calls for the SSPI to make recommendations to the SBE by March 2016 on the expansion of CAASPP assessments. Expansion activities for CAASPP may include new assessments in history-social science, visual and performing arts, technology, or other mathematics and science end-of-course tests. The CDE has held stakeholder meetings to gain input on these content areas and is in the process of developing the SSPI’s report. As other states are moving toward reducing statewide testing programs, California’s policy makers are also considering reducing testing time of students in planning changes to the assessment system. Other test topics that have been raised by advocates include environmental literacy and civics education. A Blueprint for Environmental Literacy will be released soon.

2 of 13

2015 North-South Information Meetings The CDE is planning the 2015 Assessment and Accountability North-South Information meetings. This year’s meetings will focus on celebrating successes, particularly the hard work of everyone in the state who has brought about the successful development and implementation of Smarter Balanced and other tests over the last several years and who are working toward continual success for the future. The North Meeting will be held on September 18, 2015, in Sacramento, and the South Meeting will be held on September 29, 2015, in Ontario. Online registration and presentation topics will be available in late August 2015. Local educational agency (LEA) test coordinators will have two weeks of early access to register for the meetings. More information is available on the CDE 2015 North-South Information Meetings Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ai/infomeeting.asp. ELPAC Contract The CDE was successful in overcoming a bid protest for the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC) contract. As of July 7, 2015, the ETS is the new ELPAC contractor. The CDE conducted an orientation meeting with ETS in mid-July to discuss tasks under the ELPAC contract. Although the timeline for the implementation of the ELPAC has been delayed by three months, the CDE and ETS are working to catch up in order to meet the original timeline of pilot testing in 2015–16, field testing in 2016–17, and operational administration in 2017–18. It is anticipated that the test blueprints and regulations will be ready for SBE action at its November 2015 meeting. Additional refinements are currently being made to the regulations related to issues of English learner (ELs) who have disabilities, and additional stakeholder input is being gathered on this topic. Further work and discussion is occurring on ETS’s proposed multistage adaptive test design for the ELPAC Initial assessment. It is also anticipated that the implementation of the ELPAC may cross over two school years, i.e., the contract will start first with development of the ELPAC summative assessment to be administered in spring of the 2017–18 school year followed by the development of the Initial assessment to be administered in July of 2018. Once the ELPAC is fully operational, the Initial assessment will be given in the fall, and the summative assessment will be given in the spring. The ELPAC summative results, including initially identified English learners, will be used for Title III Accountability reporting beginning with the 2017–18 school year. CELDT Because the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) must still be administered until the ELPAC is operational, Educational Data Systems will continue through December of 2016 as the contractor to administer the 2015–16 CELDT. The 2014–15 CELDT Annual Assessment (AA) data will be released to the public on CDE’s DataQuest Web site in summer 2015. The CELDT contractor will print and ship AA Window paper summary reports (Performance Level Summary Report and Roster Report) to LEAs approximately August 1–September 1, 2015. The final 2015–16 Edition Scoring Training of Trainers (STOT) Workshops are scheduled for August 18, 2015 in Costa Mesa and August 20, 2015 in Sacramento. For more information, view the STOT Statewide Workshops Registration Information Web page at http://celdt.org/training/stot/registration.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ai/infomeeting.asp

http://celdt.org/training/stot/registration

3 of 13

As of June 24, 2015, 11 CELDT administration regional workshops have been scheduled across 14 locations. These workshops are posted on the CELDT Web site on the 2015–16 Regional Workshops List Web page at http://www.celdt.org/training/stot/regional. Important CELDT dates in 2015: On July 1, 2015, the 2015–16 CELDT AA and Initial Assessment windows opened. On October 31, 2015, the 2015–16 CELDT AA window closes. More information on the CELDT and ELPAC is available on the CDE CELDT Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el/. Questions about or input for the CELDT or the ELPAC may be directed to the ELPA Office by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-319-0784. CAHSEE/High School Equivalency Tests Legislation Senate Bill (SB) 172 (Liu), sponsored by the SSPI, would suspend the administration of the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE) and would remove the high school exit examination as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation or a condition of graduation from high school for each pupil completing grade twelve for the 2014–15, 2015–16, 2016–17, 2017–18, and 2018–19 school years. The bill was placed on the Appropriations Suspense file until August 28, 2015. CDE staff are exploring the possibility of conducting a November 2015 administration in the event that SB 172 does not pass. The CDE will provide an update and more information to LEAs shortly. SB 252 (Leno), supported by the SSPI, would prohibit the CDE from charging the fee for high school equivalency and proficiency examination applications for a homeless child or youth under 25 years of age with verification of his or her status as a homeless youth. Existing law authorizes the CDE to charge a fee for each examination application for the California High School Proficiency Examination (CHSPE), General Educational Development (GED) Test, High School Equivalency Test (HiSET®), and Test Assessing Secondary Completion (TASC™). SB 252 would provide that no additional state funds be appropriated for purposes of implementing the provisions. If the bill is passed, funds to implement the requirements may result in higher fees for other test applicants. More information about the CAHSEE, CHSPE, or High School Equivalency Tests is available on the CDE Testing Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/. Questions about these assessments should be directed to the High School and Physical Fitness Assessment Office by phone at 916-445-9438. Legislative Information Legislative information pertaining to education in California (e.g., EC, regulations, waivers) is available on the CDE Laws & Regulations Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/. The latest information about current bills working through the State Senate and Assembly is available at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.

Smarter Balanced (Michelle Center, Deborah Baumgartner, Bernadine Holman, Shobhana Rishi, Chad Portney)

http://www.celdt.org/training/stot/regional

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/el/


http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/

4 of 13

Planned CAASPP System Downtimes Upcoming downtimes of the CAASPP System will include: (1) August 1–9, 2015, for the Test Administrator (TA) Interface, Interim Assessment Hand Scoring System (IAHSS), and Appeals System; (2) August 1–6, 2015, for the Online Reporting System (ORS) in which results will be viewable but frozen as of July 31,2015; and (3) August 7–9, 2015, for the ORS in which no results are available. As of August 10, 2015, the data is scheduled to be available in the Test Operations Management System (TOMS). Summative Assessments 2015 Testing Window Ending All Smarter Balanced Testing will be completed on July 31, 2015. All tests not completed or reported will be processed and sent to hand scoring and reporting. New Web Postings

• A Student Score Report Video in Spanish has been posted to the CDE CAASPP Individual Score Reports Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caaspp15rpttalkpts.asp.

• The CDE is posting an optional parent/guardian student score report template letter to the CDE CAASPP Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/documents/caaspp15screcovltr.doc.

• CDE has posted the Smarter Balanced Scale Score Ranges by Content Area and Grade to the CDE CAASPP Individual Score Reports Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caaspp15rpttalkpts.asp.

Reporting Update

• ETS will begin mailing Student Score Reports to LEAs at the end of July. Student Score Reports must be distributed to parents within 20 working days of receipt of reports if school is in session.

• Superintendents will soon be receiving a letter regarding the schedule for release of 2015 data and results.

• LEA CAASPP Coordinators using ORS preliminary claim-level ELA results for analytical purposes are advised to access the updated results. Note: LEA CAASPP Coordinators should also remind others that the data are preliminary results. The data available in the CAASPP ORS of partial and preliminary aggregate results are not appropriate for public release. The ORS will have a feature that will flag results as preliminary or not. As a real-time system, results will change as additional data is received and relevant appeals and rescores are processed. These changes may result in final scores being higher or lower than the preliminary results posted to the ORS. The CDE recommends that data from the ORS only be released publically following the state level release of assessment data that occurs in August. Scores and achievement levels from the Smarter Balanced assessments cannot and should not be compared with data from the STAR Program because (1) different standards are being assessed; (2) different assessment methods are being used; and (3) different levels of cognitive rigor are being assessed.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caaspp15rpttalkpts.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/documents/caaspp15screcovltr.doc

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caaspp15rpttalkpts.asp

5 of 13

• Because ORS will be available in view-only mode from August 1–6, 2015, new users created during this time will not have access to ORS. New scores will be available August 10, 2015.

Upcoming and Future Activities/Issues • A CAASPP Parent Guide is being completed and is scheduled to be available at

approximately the same time as when the individual score reports (ISRs) are being sent to parents. This Guide will include sample items and is anticipated to be a one-year document. In the future as more exemplars and sample items are added, the CDE will transition the Guide to a http://samplequestions.org type of site.

• The CAASPP Teacher Guide will include the same information from the Parent Guide but include additional, more details needed by teachers, such as information on blueprints, descriptors, and claims.

• The public release aggregate reports will include data disaggregated by subgroup, including by ELs and students with disabilities, but will not include a breakout for foster youth. The CDE will provide a separate report for the foster youth subgroup.

• Pursuant to California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 5, Section 852, LEAs shall notify parents each year of student participation in the CAASPP System and of the parental exemption provisions outlined in EC Section 60615. These sections of the CCR and EC are noted on slide 25 on the CAASPP 101 PowerPoint file on the CDE CAASPP System Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/. The CDE has not and is not scheduled to provide a template notification for LEAs regarding a parent or guardian’s right to excuse his or her child from any or all parts of the assessments. LEAs have until September 15, 2015, to update their Special Condition Codes in TOMS, including parent exemption and medical emergency codes. For many districts, the condition code deadline occurs after the generation of the individual student reports; therefore, an individual student report will be generated for those students who did not test but had an exemption. An LEA may wish to pull those individual student reports from mailings.

Interim Assessments The Interim Assessment (IA) results from the 2014–15 school year will remain available in the IA Reporting System until further notice. On August 10, 2015, the IAs will be open for the 2015–16 school year. At that time, students will have three opportunities to take the Interim Comprehensive Assessments (ICAs) and unlimited opportunities to take the Interim Assessment Blocks (IABs). All IAs will be available to all students. For the 2015–16 school year, IAs will not be adaptive. In addition, no new content is scheduled to be added. More information on IAs is available on the CDE Interim Assessments Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/sbacinterimassess.asp. Digital Library A new, redesigned Digital Library landing page and other enhancements were launched in June 2015. The CDE continues to encourage LEA coordinators to register all teachers for the Digital Library and to encourage those who register to continually check the page and resources. LEA CAASPP Coordinators who need assistance registering new users are encouraged to contact the Digital Library Help Desk by phone at 855-631-1510.

http://samplequestions.org/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/sbacinterimassess.asp

6 of 13

Approximately 130 California educators are part of the State Network of Educators (SNE) team that will evaluate professional learning resources for inclusion in the Smarter Balanced Digital Library. California’s SNE team consists largely of K–12 public education representatives, including classroom teachers and curriculum and instruction specialists who are also familiar with special populations. In July 2015, a Smarter Balanced SNE Workshop was held, and 26 members of California’s SNE participated along with four CDE state leadership team members. The workshop included information about training, review, and submissions to the Digital Library. An update about the Formative Assessment Insights Course has been provided by WestEd describing the course designed for SNEs and California educators. It will begin September 2015 and run through February 2016, with a kick off Webinar for district and school leadership on August 27, 2015. Applications for the course will be reopened from August 1–15, 2015. Educators should use the following link to apply for the course: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FAI-California. For more information, go to WestEd’s Formative Assessment Insights Web page at http://fa-insights.wested.org. For immediate questions, contact Jennifer Houle by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-323-8351. A new 29-minute training video entitled “Exploring the Smarter Balanced Digital Library” has been posted on the CDE Digital Library Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/diglib.asp. The video includes an overview of the formative assessment process, information about logging into and navigating the Digital Library, and features for cross-state collaboration.

More information about the Digital Library is located on the CDE Digital Library Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/diglib.asp. Upcoming Training Opportunities for Educators Four types of training opportunities will soon be available to provide professional development for teachers on use of Smarter Balanced assessments, including model lessons and use of the rubrics. The trainings will include: (1) Summer Scoring Workshops (August), (2) Interim Assessment/Digital Library Clinics (August–September), (3) IA Hand Scoring Workshops (September–October), and (4) CAASPP Institutes (October–November). Dates are currently being finalized and more information will be provided shortly.

More Information The CDE CAASPP Communications Toolkit Web page is continually being updated, and there are many new and helpful resources. It is located on the CDE CAASPP Communications Toolkit Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/communicationskit.asp. Questions about or input for the Smarter Balanced Assessment System may be directed to the CAASPP Office by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-445-8765.

CAASPP Update (Don Killmer) CAA The CAA Field Test window opened on April 15, 2015 and closed on June 10, 2015. The CDE continues to have conversations with the National Center and State Collaborative (NCSC) as

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FAI-California

http://fa-insights.wested.org/


http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/diglib.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/diglib.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/communicationskit.asp


7 of 13

plans are developed for operational testing beginning in 2015–16. The CAA Field Test scores will not be reported but are being used to develop the items and design for the operational test. The CAA blueprints for ELA and mathematics were presented and approved by the SBE at its July 2015 meeting. The new blueprints reflect the new CAA test design, standards, and item types. The standards assessed on the new CAA are reached through scaffolding from the California State Standards to the Essential Understandings by the Core Content Connectors (CCCs) from NCSC, which are aligned with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). The goal of blueprint development was to align the new CAA blueprints as closely with NCSC as possible, and this alignment can be observed in the percentages assessed for each domain or group of domains. The general CAA test design, like that of NCSC, is planned as a two-stage adaptive assessment. Each student, within a grade level, in stage one, will see a set of items [the Router] to route them to stage two. On the basis of the student’s performance in stage one, stage two will present the student items in one of three tiers (CAA is designed with three tiers of complexity). In addition, multiple point values will be assigned for certain item standards to account for the different cognitive complexities of skills assessed by those items. The implementation of this two-stage adaptive design is currently planned to occur over two years with the goal of having enough psychometric information in the first year to narrow the routing design for the second year. In 2015–16, students would have more items at stage one (21 items) than at stage two (6 items), and in 2016–17 students would have fewer items at stage one (9 items) than at stage two (16 items). By 2016–17, students will take a shorter test that will route them more quickly to their stage two levels based on their performance at stage one. The feasibility of incorporating a further refined design for 2017–18 is also being investigated. There will be a stopping rule for 2016–17 specifically for those students who do not demonstrate any performance that is measureable on the first several items. The July 2015 SBE item is available on the CDE SBE Agenda for July 2015 Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/yr15/agenda201507.asp, Item #4. Attachments 1–3 show the CAA blueprints. The test design for the CAA is planned to be provided to the SBE in an August 2015 memorandum. Training on the new CAA is scheduled for January 2016. The SBE is scheduled to adopt achievement level descriptors and the number of achievement levels at its March 2016 meeting, and administration of the operational test will be a fixed window from April 11, 2016, through June 20, 2016. The standard setting for the test will occur in summer 2016, and the SBE is scheduled to determine cut scores in September 2016. The 2016 CAA results are scheduled to be available fall 2016 following the SBE adoption of cut scores, and public reporting of results is scheduled for November 2016. Next Generation Science Assessments The CDE is continuing in the development of the new science assessments based on the CA NGSS. During the transition to the new science assessments, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)-required science assessments in grades five, eight, and ten (i.e., CST, CMA, and CAPA) will continue to be administered until new assessments aligned to the CA NGSS are available. The new science assessments will include one assessment for students who currently take the CST and CMA in science and a second alternate assessment for students who currently take the CAPA in science. Therefore, a student who is currently taking the CMA in science would take the new science assessment with appropriate accommodations rather than taking the new alternate assessment in science. Also, the new science assessments

http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/yr15/agenda201507.asp

8 of 13

are not planned as adaptive tests under the current contract through June 2018 but may be adaptive at a future time. The CDE anticipates targeted pilot testing of the new science assessments in 2016–17, field testing in 2017–18, and operational testing in 2018–19. Recommendations are scheduled to go to the SBE at its September 2015 meeting, and the blueprints for the new science assessments are scheduled to be presented to the SBE at its November 2015 meeting. More information about recent CAASPP science activities is provided in the July 2015 SBE item that is available on the CDE SBE Agenda for July 2015 Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/yr15/agenda201507.asp, Item #3. More information about the development of the new science assessments can also be found on the CDE Science Assessments Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caasppscience.asp. CAASPP Regulations The CDE is proposing emergency amendments to the CAASPP regulations scheduled for presentation to the SBE at its September 2015 meeting. The regulations propose increased flexibility in current program requirements to include: (1) revised definitions toward more common terminology; (2) more flexibility for LEAs to set a smaller testing window; (3) revised apportionment certification dates; (4) updated universal tools, designated supports, and accommodations to be aligned and flexible with Smarter Balanced and NCSC definitions; (5) definitions of eligible students according to the test given; and (6) definitions and resolutions for appeals. More information on the CAASPP is available on the CDE CAASPP Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/. Questions about or input for the CAASPP may be directed to the CAASPP Office by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-445-8765.

CAASPP Institutes (Keith Smith, Rachel Perry from SCOE)

The CDE has contracted with the Sacramento County Office of Education (SCOE) on a one-year project to encourage and support local collaboration and training toward implementing the Smarter Balanced Assessment System to improve teaching and learning. A key aspect of the project will be to provide a series of CAASPP Institutes for LEAs. The project will include four interrelated activities:

1. Increase the number of Senior Assessment Fellows from three to six. The Fellows now include Marci Perry, Mary Tribbey, Gina Koency, Sally Bennett-Schmidt, Roger Yoho, and Ingrid Roberson. The focus of the Senior Assessment Fellows will be to provide LEAs with on-demand, customized presentations and training to support the CAASPP system, with a particular focus on the Smarter Balanced assessment system.

2. Deliver 14 CAASPP Institutes that will bring together interdisciplinary LEA teams from across the state to deepen their understanding of the Smarter Balanced Assessment System and develop plans for their LEAs to implement all three parts of the Smarter Balanced Assessment System.

3. Post the Institute training on the CDE CAASPP Website in digital format to encourage a trainer-of-trainers (TOT) approach within and across LEAs.


http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/caasppscience.asp

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/ca/


9 of 13

4. Deliver a June 2016 workshop in Sacramento to further develop the capacity of the SNE. The SNE are the primarily responsible for developing the resources in the Balanced Digital Library.

Current Plans for the Institutes

• The 14 Institutes are being scheduled to start between October 21 and November 20, 2015, and will be provided at various regions across California.

• Each Institute will consist of two parts. The first part will occur in October/November 2015 and be a two-day workshop. The second part will occur in February 2016 and be a one-day workshop. The primary goals are to help schools and school districts better understand all three of the components of the CAASPP Assessment System and to encourage their use of resources and strategies to improve teaching and learning in the classroom.

• The Institutes are being designed for teams of educators from schools or school districts. Each team should include staff with expertise in key areas, such as knowledge and use of curriculum content in ELA and mathematics, accessibility supports, ELs, students with disabilities, and school or district leadership/decision making. More specific guidelines for teams will be provided once the dates for the Institutes are finalized.

• Each Institute is being designed to include planning time for participants to develop action steps toward implementing the Smarter Balanced Assessment System.

• In addition to the 14 Institutes, two pre-Institute, TOT Workshops will be provided during the week of October 12, 2015. One TOT Workshop will be in northern California, and one will be in southern California. The TOT workshops are being designed for COE leaders who want to provide the Institute training for their schools and other LEAs. Because the CAASPP Institutes will not cover the entire training needs across the state, COEs can attend a TOT Workshop and be trained early with all of the content and materials covered in the Institutes. Those COE leaders who attend a TOT Workshop will have the tools to conduct one or more local CAASPP Institutes and assist in expanding the scope of the training throughout the state.

• Dates, locations, and times for the Institutes and the two TOT workshops are being finalized, and notification and details will be distributed as soon as possible through the appropriate CDE e-mail distribution lists and Web pages.

For questions or to provide input on the CAASPP Institutes project, contact Jessica Valdez at the CDE Smarter Balanced Interim Assessment and Digital Library Office by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-319-0345 or Rachel Perry at SCOE by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-228-2575.

Accountability Update (Jonathan Isler, Ryan Lam, Justin Lane)

2014–15 SARC At its July 2015 meeting, the SBE approved the 2014–15 School Accountability Report Card (SARC) template. The new template included three minor changes to align more closely with



10 of 13

the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP): (1) updated state assessment tables, (2) updated state and federal accountability tables, and (3) the addition of a new student group, foster youth, where applicable. Legislation is needed to fully align the SARC with the LCAP. The new template is scheduled to be posted in September or October, 2015. More information on the new template is provided in the July 2015 SBE item available on the CDE SBE Agenda for July 2015 Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/ag/ag/yr15/agenda201507.asp, Item #2.

A new SARC listserv has been developed and three LEAs (Elk Grove Unified, Los Angeles Unified, and San Francisco Unified) began testing the system and provided feedback to CDE. Once testing has completed, all superintendents and direct-funded charter administrators will initially be assigned as the SARC listserv administrator. The SARC administrator will have the option of assigning two staff to be the SARC listserv manager who will be able to assign the user to a secure SARC listserv. Further details are forthcoming. 2014–15 Title III Accountability Preliminary Data File On July 14, accountability and Title III coordinators were sent an e-mail informing them that the preliminary 2014–15 Title III Accountability data were posted on the CDE Web site. The data include the number and percentage of students who met annual measurable achievement objectives (AMAOs) 1 and 2. The complete 2014–15 Title III Accountability report, including AMAO 3, will be released in fall 2015. The 2014–15 AMAO Targets currently are:

• AMAO 1—60.5 percent • AMAO 2 (less than five years cohort)—24.2 percent • AMAO 2 (five years or more cohort)—50.9 percent • AMAO 3 (participation rate, all LEAs)—95 percent • AMAO 3 (graduation rate, high schools)—yet to be determined

2015 AYP School Attendance Data Collection Deadline and AYP Criteria At its January 2015 meeting, the SBE approved the use of attendance rates as the additional indicator in the 2015 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) determinations for elementary and middle grades. Traditionally, the Academic Performance Index (API) was used as the additional indicator for making AYP determinations. At its May 2015 meeting, the SBE decided that prior to determining the school attendance rate target, they needed to review research on attendance rates and school-level attendance data. As a result, the CDE requested LEAs and charter schools submit attendance data for all public schools with students enrolled in transitional kindergarten (TK) through grade eight by July 10, 2015. The deadline was extended to July 24, 2015. Any LEA or school that did not submit attendance data by the July 24, 2015, will not meet the attendance rate criteria and will not make AYP. As a result, the LEA/school may advance in Program Improvement (PI). Attendance Rate Target The SBE will be making a decision on the attendance rate target at its September 2015 meeting. For the September 2015 SBE meeting, the CDE will recommend a target, which will be based on research that would support the recommended target.


11 of 13

Extended Correction Deadline and 2013–14 Cohort Graduation Data Because some LEAs requested the opportunity to make corrections to the 2013–14 cohort graduation data, the CDE extended the correction deadline to June 30, 2015. This was the final opportunity to correct these data. The 2013–14 cohort graduation data will be used to make 2015 AYP determinations. 2015 AYP Reporting In June 2015, accountability coordinators were informed of two federal accountability workbook amendments approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ED):

1. California’s one-year waiver request to not use Smarter Balanced Assessment results to

make AYP determinations. Instead, PI determinations will be based only on the participation rate and the additional indicator (attendance rate and/or graduation rate). Therefore, the 2015 criteria will be:

• A school that meets the participation rate and its additional indicator(s) will make AYP for 2015.

• Elementary and middle schools that made AYP in 2013 and 2015 will exit PI. • High schools that made AYP in 2014 and 2015 will exit PI.

2. California’s request to use grade eleven Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment

instead of grade ten CAHSEE for participation rate determinations. Therefore, the 2015 participation criteria for high schools will be:

• 95 percent participation rate on the grade eleven Smarter Balanced Summative Assessment

The CDE and the SBE are continuing conversations with the ED on the remaining accountability workbook amendments, i.e., displaying the percent proficient on the AYP reports and the inclusion of the CAA in the calculation of the participation rate. Once a final decision has been reached on these amendments, the Analysis, Measurement and Accountability Division (AMARD) will send another notification informing accountability coordinators on all changes impacting the 2015 AYP.

CALPADS Data File Containing LTELs and At-Risk of Becoming LTELs During the first week of August, LEA California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) coordinators will be receiving a file identifying Long-Term English Learners (LTELs) and student At-Risk of Becoming LTELs (At-Risk). While it is anticipated that SB 750, which revises the definition of LTEL, will pass, the file to be sent in August will identify LTELs and At-Risk students using the current definitions in EC Section 313.1. The current definitions are as follows: LTELs are defined as students who are:

• ELs in grades six through twelve; and • Enrolled in U.S. school for more than six years; and • At the same Proficiency level on the CELDT for two or more consecutive years, or

successor test. • Note that CST results will not be used as part of the criteria.

12 of 13

At-Risk of becoming LTELs are student who are: • ELs in grades five through eleven; and • Enrolled in a U.S. school for four years; and • Scored at the “Intermediate” level or below on the CELDT, or successor test.

To identify the LTELs and At-Risk students, the CDE will be extracting the October 2014 CALPADS enrollment data and matching it to the 2012–13 and 2013–14 CELDT results. DataQuest Average Class Size and TK Reports At the end of July, the average class size report will be available through DataQuest. A new selection feature, “self-contained class,” will be accessible within this report. This report will display average class size data, for self-contained classes, by grade levels. In addition to the new self-contained class feature, DataQuest will also have a new TK report (for 2013–14) that the viewer will be able to select through the “Enrollment” category. This report will display enrollment by kindergarten, TK, and TK cumulative. More information about academic accountability is on the CDE Academic Accountability Reporting Web page at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ar/. For questions about accountability, contact the academic accountability team by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-319-0863.

Ed Data Management Update (Paula Mishima)

Beginning August 1, 2015, Cindy Kazanis will become the new Director of the AMARD at CDE. The CDE is recruiting to fill her vacant position of Director of the Educational Data Management Division. CALPADS Assessment Reports The CDE is anticipating a soft roll out of 2014–15 assessment data for September 2015 with few changes. The September roll out will include streamlined functionality and all CELDT and CAHSEE results through 2014-15 and STAR data through 2012-13. The CALPADS Office has not yet drafted the report specifications for the Smarter Balanced assessment results. Once draft reports are mocked up, stakeholder input will be gathered before finalizing reports. The 2014-15 Smarter Balanced results will be loaded into CALPADS in November once a final statewide file is received from ETS. CALPADS and Smarter Balanced Alignment The CALPADS Office is working with ETS to display CALPADS field names instead of Smarter Balanced field names in TOMS and to minimize the amount of demographic data shown in TOMS to reduce confusion and Service Desk tickets. When final assessment data is aggregated for accountability calculations, federal reporting, or DataQuest posting, the CDE will use the most current data in CALPADS and not necessarily the data pulled from CALPADS at the time of testing. As has been the practice, the CDE will provide LEAs an opportunity to view and update the data in CALPADS prior to its final use.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/ar/


13 of 13

Grade Level Changes and Testing Currently, a student’s grade level can be changed at any time in CALPADS, which resulted in some students taking Smarter assessments in two different grade levels. Regulations are being drafted to address this issue. Maintaining Mailing Address for Testing CALPADS maintains only one address for a student. For students with both a residential and mailing address, LEAs should maintain the mailing address in CALPADS. The mailing address meets both the CALPADS need for use in the direct certification match process and the assessment need for LEAs opting for mailing addresses to be pre-printed on ISRs. Multiple Identifiers for One Student During Testing The CDE and ETS are investigating how to resolve the issue of correcting multiple Statewide Student Identifiers (SSIDs) for a student in the middle of testing. Some students have had to retest if an LEA had retired an old identifier during one test and used the new identifier for another test. It would be helpful if LEAs would ensure that each student has a single identifier prior to testing. LEAs can check the daily CALPADS report that shows anomalies. Corrections normally take 48 hours to process in CALPADS. Attendance Data Collection The CDE is anticipating collecting attendance data (number of days enrolled and number of days attended) beginning in 2016–17 to meet proposed federal requirements for reporting chronic absenteeism. Transition of Perkins E1 Data System to CALPADS Currently, data collected through the Perkins Data System is used to meet federal Perkins reporting requirements. In 2014-15, LEAs are also required to submit Career Technical Education (CTE) data (concentrators and completers) to CALPADS, and, in 2015-16, data from CALPADS will be used to meet federal Perkins reporting requirements. CTE data is likely to also be used for accountability in the future. Transition of CASEMIS Data System to CALPADS The CDE is in the process of transitioning the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) to CALPADS over the next several years. The first set of data to be transitioned is discipline data. To meet federal reporting requirements, CASEMIS discipline data will be used in 2014–15, and end-of-year 3 CALPADS discipline data will be used in 2015–16 to meet federal reporting requirements. Eventually, all of the CASEMIS will be transitioned to CALPADS. For questions about CALPADS, contact the CALPADS Office by e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 916-324-6738.

Next RAN Meeting

Wednesday, September 9, 2015 (Citizen Hotel—Sacramento)


DISTRICT13/14 14/15 15/16 Total D /W Resolution Mediation Settled Hearing

Aveson Global Leadership Acad N/A N/A 0Aveson School of Leaders N/A N/A 0Desert Trails Prep Academy 0 0 0Encore High School, Riverside 0 0 0Encore Junior/Senior High School N/A N/A 0LaVerne Elem Preparatory 0 0 0Odyssey Charter School N/A N/A 0Taylion High Desert Academy 0 0 0

SELPA-WIDE TOTALS 0 0 0

Districts showing a value of .25 above indicates that the district is a co-respondent with 3 other districts.Districts showing a value of .50 above indicates that the district is a co-respondent with another district.

Desert/Mountain CharterDue Process Summary

July 1, 2015 - August 28, 2015

CASE ACTIVITY FOR CURRENT YEAR D = Complaint Dismissed W = Complaint Withdrawn

DISTRICT06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 Total D /W Resolution Mediation Settled Hearing

Adelanto SD 0.5 3 4.5 0 2 0 3 6 5.5 24.5 0 0 0 0 0Apple Valley USD 2 6 7 2 1.33 0 0 2 1 21.33 0 0 0 0 0Baker USD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Barstow USD 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0Bear Valley USD 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0Helendale SD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Hesperia USD 1 1 3 2.5 1 5.5 4 3 5 26 0 0 0 0 0Lucerne Valley USD 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 2 1 8 0 0 0 0 0Needles USD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Oro Grande SD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Silver Valley USD 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0Snowline USD 1 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 5 1.5 13.5 0 0 1.5 0 0Trona USD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Victor Elementary SD 1.5 3 0 1 1 1 1 4.33 3.33 0.33 16.5 0 0 0.33 0 0Victor Valley Union High SD 0 2 1.5 2.5 0 2 4 3.33 4.3 0.33 20 0 0 0.33 0 0

Academy for Academic Excellence 0 0 0 0 1.33 0 0 4 2 7.33 0 0 0 0 0CA Charter Academy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Desert/Mountain OPS 0 0 0 0 0.34 0.5 1 1.33 0.83 0.83 5 0 0 0.83 0 0Excelsior Education Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Explorer Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0High Tech Elementary 0 0 0 0 0 0High Tech Middle 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0High Tech High 0 0 0.5 0 0 2 2 0 1 5.5 0 0 0 0 0High Tech High International 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 0 0High Tech High Media Arts 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0High Tech Middle Media Arts 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0High Tech High Statewide Benefit 0 2 1 0 1 2 0 2 1 9 0 0 0 0 0

SELPA-WIDE TOTALS 7 18 19 8 15 17 18 33 30 3 168 0 0 3 0 0

Districts showing a value of .25 above indicates that the district is a co-respondent with 3 other districts.Districts showing a value of .50 above indicates that the district is a co-respondent with another district.

Desert/Mountain SELPADue Process Summary

July 1, 2015 - August 28, 2015

CASE ACTIVITY FOR CURRENT YEAR D = Complaint Dismissed W = Complaint Withdrawn

Desert Mountain SELPA Due Process Activity Summary July 1, 2015 – August 28, 2015

Printed on 8/25/15 Page 1

DISTRICT ISSUE STATUS 1.

Snowline JUSD/D/M Operations Case No. 2015071107 Case Filed 07/27/15

The parent filed a due process complaint alleging for stay put at previous county placement

• 08/07/15 – resolution session held • 08/18/15 – mediation cancelled • 08/20/14 – mediation scheduled • 09/08/15 – due process hearing scheduled

2. Snowline JUSD Case No. TBA

Case Filed 08/21/15

District filed a due process complaint asking for an ALJ to order the district to conduct triennial assessments without parental consent

• mediation TBA • due process hearing TBD

3. Victor Valley Union HSD

Victor Elem SD Desert/Mtn Operations Case No. 2015080412 Case Filed 08/10/15

Parent filed a due process complaint alleging a denial of FAPE due to a lack of triennial assessments, consistent staffing and placement in the least restrictive environment.

• 08/20/15 – resolution session held • 09/21/15 – mediation scheduled • 10/21/15 – due process hearing scheduled • 08/20/15 – interim agreement signed

2000-2001 $39,301.512001-2002 $97,094.902002-2003 $37,695.132003-2004 $100,013.022004-2005 $136,514.092005-2006 $191,605.082006-2007 $140,793.002007-2008 $171,614.042008-2009 $263,390.712009-2010 $114,076.962010-2011 $293,578.502011-2012 $567,958.102012-2013 $321,646.042013-2014 $250,372.652014-2015 $297,277.762015-2016 $17,501.79

Desert /Mountain SELPALegal Expense SummaryAs of August 28, 2015

Profile of Due Process Complaints Received Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH)

http://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/SpecialEducation/Resources/SEReportArchive.aspx

The following information is from OAH reports for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Quarters of the 2014-2015 fiscal year. OVERVIEW: As part of its interagency agreement with the California Department of Education (CDE), the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) is required to collect particular data concerning its special education dispute resolution duties and report that information quarterly. Below, we examine in detail the profile of these special education filings and summarize some of the more interesting data as reported by OAH. NUMBER OF FILINGS: Overall, there were 1,104 cases filed during the 4th Quarter, which consisted of 947 student-filed cases and 157 district-filed cases. Of the student-filed cases, 11 cases involved both expedited and non-expedited issues (dual hearings), and one case that was exclusively expedited issue(s). Of the 157 district-filed cases, there was one case that involved expedited issue(s) and none for dual hearing. Of the 1,104 cases opened by OAH during the 4th Quarter, 1,091 had requests for mediation related to due process hearing or mediation-only. Of the 1,091 requests for mediation, 78 were requests for mediation-only. The remaining 1,004 requests for mediation were related to due process hearing requests.

Quarter Student-filed District-filed Year-to-Date New Case Filings

1st (July 1st - September 30th) 868 124 992 2nd (October 1st - December 31st) 745 121 866

3rd (January 1st - March 31st) 774 158 932 4th (April 1st - June 30th) 947 157 1,104

TOTALS: 3,334 560 3,894

Case Type 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date District DPH 100 93 129 123 445 District DPH Only 0 2 0 3 5 District Dual 1 0 0 0 1 District Expedited 0 3 1 1 5 District Med Only 23 23 28 30 104

Total District Filings 124 121 158 157 560 Student DPH 829 692 727 881 3,129 Student DPH Only 6 8 7 6 27 Student Dual 9 12 16 11 48 Student Expedited 3 5 1 1 10 Student Med Only 21 28 23 48 120

Total Student Filings 868 745 774 947 3,334 TOTALS: 992 866 932 1,104 3,894

http://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/SpecialEducation/Resources/SEReportArchive.aspx

Profile of Due Process Complaints Received Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Reports for 2014-2015 Page 2 LEGAL REPRESENTATION: Of the 1,104 cases filed during the 4th Quarter, 83% were requests filed with representation.

Legal Representation 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date % of Student Requests filed with Representation 87% 87% 85% 83% 86% % of District Requests filed with Representation 85% 83% 84% 82% 83% % Overall requests filed with Representation 87% 87% 85% 83% 85%

GRADE LEVEL: The majority of the 1,104 cases filed during the 4th Quarter originated from students in the primary grades (562), followed by those in high school (260), junior high school (171), and preschool (111). The grade level of the student was specified in all of the case filings.

Grade Level 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date Pre-School (<5) 74 57 68 111 310 Primary (5-12) 510 449 468 562 1,989 Junior High School (13-14) 165 141 142 171 619 High School (15-22) 243 219 254 260 976

TOTAL 992 866 932 1,104 3,894 ISSUES AND REMEDIES: Cases filed during 4th Quarter involved a variety of issues and requested remedies. The number of issues varied per case, with some cases raising only one issue, and others raising several issues. The most common issues raised during the 4th quarter were related services (752) and placement (657). Other issues included: ABA services (82), assessment (565), compensatory education (524), related services (752), discipline (13), eligibility (80), extended school year (91), goals and objectives (114), mental health (68), occupational therapy (230), one-to-one aide (197), placement (657), private services (116), procedural violations (116), reimbursement (398), and speech and language (349).

Issues and Remedies 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date ABA 73 45 32 82 232 Assessment 489 431 448 565 1,933 Compensatory Education 441 440 460 524 1,865 Discipline 13 20 22 13 68 Eligibility 86 53 94 80 313 Extended School Year 104 58 77 91 330 Goals and Objectives 137 56 85 114 392 Mental Health 54 59 67 68 248 Occupational Therapy 225 167 193 230 815 One-to-One Aide 150 133 154 197 634 Placement 629 472 519 657 2,277 Private Services 69 38 69 116 292 Procedural 114 132 71 116 433 Reimbursement 381 322 367 398 1,468 Related Services 625 622 659 752 2,658 Speech and Language 318 220 260 349 1,147

Profile of Due Process Complaints Received Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Reports for 2014-2015 Page 3 CLOSED CASES: The majority of cases closed during the 4th Quarter were settled at mediation (403), followed by those that were settled outside mediation or resolution session (349), and those cases withdrawn by the filing party without explanation (226). Additionally, during this quarter, 60 cases resolved at resolution session, 23 mediation-only cases were not settled at mediation, seven mediation-only cases were closed due to a party declining participation, two cases were dismissed by an order granting motion to dismiss, two cases were dismissed after failing to amend following a notice of insufficiency, and 10 cases for inactivity (4) and other reasons (6). No cases were closed at a settlement conference. Out of the 1,104 cases closed during the 4th quarter, 22 were closed following a hearing and decision on the merits.

Reason for Closure 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date Decision Issued 15 25 17 22 79 Declined Participation (Mediation-only Case) 1 4 5 7 17 Failure to File Amended Complaint 2 4 2 2 10 Inactivity 4 8 5 4 21 Motion to Dismiss 7 7 7 2 23 Not Settled (Mediation-only Case) 15 11 19 23 68 Settled at Mediation 374 276 322 403 1,375 Settled at Resolution Session 44 32 30 60 166 Settled Outside Mediation or Resolution Session 402 308 349 349 1,408 Settlement Conference 0 0 0 0 0 Withdrawn 122 197 172 226 717 Other 4 6 2 6 18

TOTAL 990 878 930 1,104 3,902 HEARING PREVAILING PARTIES: Based upon the issues for hearing identified by the parties, during the 4th Quarter districts prevailed on all issues in 11 hearings and students prevailed on all issues in two hearings. In 9 of the 22 decisions issued, the issues in the decision were split between student and district, with students prevailing on 18 issues and districts prevailing on 66.

Hearing Prevailing Parties 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date Student Prevailed 2 4 1 2 9 District Prevailed 8 8 15 11 42 Split Decisions 7 14 2 9 32

Student Prevailed on Number of Issues 17 18 8 18 61 District Prevailed on Number of Issues 17 68 52 66 203

Number of prehearing motion filed by each side 273 251 563 343 1,430 Motions filed by the Student 53 57 146 78 334 Motions filed by the District 39 38 109 64 250 Stipulated Motions 181 156 308 201 846

Party that won most of the Prehearing Motions - - - - - Motions filed by the Student that were Granted 33 42 96 53 224 Motions filed by the District that were Granted 29 29 83 46 187 Stipulated Motions that were Granted 176 153 303 195 827

Profile of Due Process Complaints Received Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) Reports for 2014-2015 Page 4 DISABILITY AREA: The hearings during the 4th Quarter involved multiple areas of disability. The cases involved students identified with a disability area of Autism (342), Deafness (5), Emotional Disturbance (71), Hearing Impaired (164), Intellectual Disability (67), Multiple Disabilities (20), Orthopedic Impaired (20), Other Health Impaired (164), Specific Learning Disabilities (167), Speech or Language Impairment (123), Traumatic Brain Injury (1), and Visual Impairment (4). In 282 cases the student was found not eligible.

Disability Area 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Year-to-Date Autism 315 260 287 342 1,204 Deaf/Blind 1 3 3 0 7 Deafness 13 8 7 5 33 Emotional Disturbance 66 84 69 71 290 Hearing Impaired 10 11 12 164 197 Intellectual Disability 52 69 67 67 255 Multiple Disabilities 28 14 24 20 86 Not Identified 216 223 207 282 928 Orthopedic Impaired 22 19 23 20 84 Other Health Impaired 133 121 163 164 581 Specific Learning Disabilities 176 112 142 167 597 Speech or Language Impairment 114 107 116 123 460 Traumatic Brain Injury 1 4 4 1 10 Visual Impairment 6 8 3 4 21

TOTAL 1,153 1,043 1,127 1,430 121

NONPUBLIC, NONSECTARIAN SCHOOL/AGENCY SERVICES

MASTER CONTRACT

2015-2016

MASTER CONTRACT GENERAL AGREEMENT FOR NONSECTARIAN, NONPUBLIC SCHOOL AND AGENCY SERVICES

Nonpublic School Nonpublic Agency

Type of Contract:

Master Contract for fiscal year with Individual Service Agreements (ISA) to be approved throughout the term of this contract.

Individual Master Contract for a specific student incorporating the Individual Service Agreement (ISA)

into the terms of this Individual Master Contract specific to a single student.

Interim Contract: an extension of the previous fiscal years approved contracts and rates. The sole purpose

of this Interim Contract is to provide for ongoing funding at the prior year’s rates for ninety (90) days at the sole discretion of the LEA. Expiration Date:

When this section is included as part of any Master Contract, the changes specified above shall amend Section 4 – Term of Master Contract.

District

Contract Year 2015-2016

DISTRICT MASTER CONTRACT GENERAL AGREEMENT FOR NONSECTARIAN,

NONPUBLIC SCHOOL/AGENCY SERVICES 2015-2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. MASTER CONTRACT 1 2 CERTIFICATIONS AND LICENSES 1-2 3. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS, STATUTES, REGULATIONS 2 4. TERM OF MASTER CONTRACT 3 5. INTEGRATION/CONTINUANCE OF CONTRACT FOLLOWING EXPIRATION OR 3 TERMINATION 6. INDIVIDUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT 3-4 7. DEFINITIONS 4-5 II. ADMINISTRATION OF CONTRACT 8. NOTICES 5 9. MANTENANCE OF RECORDS 6-7 10. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE 7 11. SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST 7 12. VENUE AND GOVERNING LAW 7 13. MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LEGAL AND 7 ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES 14. TERMINATION 7 15. INSURANCE 7-10 16. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS 10 17. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR 10-11 18. SUBCONTRACTING 11 19. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 11-12 20. NON-DISCRIMINATION 12 III. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 21. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 12-13 22. FREE AND APPRPRIATE PUBLIC EDUCATION 13 23. GENERAL PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION 13-14 24. INSTRUCTIONAL MINUTES 14-15 25. CLASS SIZE 15 26. CALENDARS 15-16 27. DATA REPORTING 16 28. LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT/DUAL ENROLLMENT 16 29. STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING AND HIGH SCHOOL EXIT EXAMINATION 17 30. MANDATED ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS 17 31. POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTIONS 17-18 32. STUDENT DISCIPLINE 18-19 33. IEP TEAM MEETINGS 19-20 34. SURROGATE PARENTS 20 35. DUE PROCESS PROCEEDINGS 20 36. COMPLAINT PROCEDURES 20 37. STUDENT PROGRESS REPORTS/REPORT CARDS AND ASSESSMENTS 20-21 38. TRANSCRIPTS 21 39. STUDENT CHANGE OF RESIDENCE 21 40. WITHDRAWAL OF LEA STUDENT FROM PROGRAM 22 41. PARENT ACCESS 22 42. SERVICES AND SUPERVISION AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 22-23 43. LICENSED CHILDREN’S INSTITUTION CONTRACTORS 23 44. STATE MEAL MANDATE 24 45. MONITORING 24



TABLE OF CONTENTS

IV. PERSONNEL 46. CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS 24-25 47. STAFF QUALIFICATIONS 25-26 48. VERIFICATION OF LICENSES, CREDENTIALS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS 26 49. STAFF ABSENCE 26-27 50. STAFF PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR WHEN PROVIDING SERVICES AT SCHOOL 27 OR SCHOOL RELATED EVENTS OR AT SCHOOL FACILITY AND/OR IN THE HOME V. HEALTH AND SAFETY MANDATES 51. HEALTH AND SAFETY 27-28 52. FACILITIES AND FACILITIES MODIFICATION 28 53. ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICATION 28 54. INDICENT/ACCIDENT REPORTING 28-29 55. CHILD ABUSE REPORTING 29 56. SEXUAL HARASSMENT 29 57. REPORTING OF MISSING CHILDREN 29 VI. FINANCIAL 58. ENROLLMENT, CONTRACTING, SERVICE TRACKING, ATTENDANCE REPORTING 29-30 AND BILLING PROCEDURES 59. RIGHT TO WITHHOLD PAYMENT 30-32 60. PAYMENT FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES 32 61. PAYMENT FOR ABSENCES 32-33 62. INSPECTION AND AUDIT 33-34 63. RATE SCHEDULE 34 64. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION 34 EXHIBIT A: RATES



- 1 - 2015-2016 NPA Master Contract

2015-2016 LEA: California Health and Education Linked Professions Joint Powers Agreement (CAHELP JPA)

NONPUBLIC SCHOOL/AGENCY/RELATED SERVICES PROVIDER:

NONPUBLIC, NONSECTARIAN SCHOOL/AGENCY SERVICES MASTER CONTRACT

AUTHORIZATION FOR MASTER CONTRACT AND GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. MASTER CONTRACT This Master Contract is entered into this 1st day of July, 2015, between the

California Health and Education Linked Professions Joint Powers Authority (CAHELP JPA) through the Desert/Mountain SELPA, Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA, and Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (hereinafter referred to as “CAHELP JPA”), authorized as the Local Educational Agency representative/contracting agent, under the direction of its member districts (hereinafter referred to as “LEA”) and (hereinafter referred to as “CONTRACTOR”) for the purpose of providing special education and/or related services to LEA students with exceptional needs under the authorization of California Education Code sections 56157, 56361 and 56365 et seq. and Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3000 et seq., AB490 (Chapter 862, Statutes of 2003) and AB1858 (Chapter 914, Statutes of 2004). It is understood that this agreement does not commit the LEA to pay for special education and/or related services provided to any LEA student, or CONTRACTOR to provide such special education and/or related services, unless and until an authorized LEA representative approves the provision of special education and/or related services by CONTRACTOR.

Upon acceptance of an LEA student, the LEA shall submit to the CONTRACTOR an Individual Services Agreement (hereinafter referred to as “ISA”) and a Nonpublic School Placement Referral packet and Student Enrollment form as specified in the LEA Procedures. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, these forms shall acknowledge CONTRACTOR’s obligation to provide all services specified in the LEA student’s Individualized Education Plan (hereinafter referred to as “IEP”). The ISA shall be executed within ninety (90) days of an LEA student’s enrollment. LEA and CONTRACTOR shall enter into an ISA for each LEA student served by CONTRACTOR. As available and appropriate, the LEA shall make available access to any electronic IEP system and/or electronic database for ISA developing including invoicing.

Unless placement is made pursuant to an Office of Administrative Hearings (hereinafter referred to as “OAH”) order, a lawfully executed agreement between LEA and parent or authorized by LEA for a transfer student pursuant to California Education Code section 56325, LEA is not responsible for the costs associated with nonpublic school placement until the date on which an IEP team meeting is convened, the IEP team determines that a nonpublic school placement is appropriate, and the IEP is signed by the LEA student’s parent.

2. CERTIFICATIONS AND LICENSES

CONTRACTOR shall be certified by the California Department of Education (hereinafter referred to as “CDE”) as a nonpublic, nonsectarian school/agency. All nonpublic school and nonpublic agency services shall be provided consistent with the area of certification specified by CDE Certification and as defined in California Education Code section 56366 et seq. and within the professional scope of practice of each provider’s license, certification and/or credential.




A current copy of CONTRACTOR’s nonpublic school/agency certification or waiver of such certification issued by the CDE pursuant to Education Code section 56366.2 must be provided to the LEA on or before the date this contract is executed by CONTRACTOR. This Master Contract shall be null and void if such certification or waiver is expired, revoked, rescinded, or otherwise nullified during the effective period of this Master Contract. CONTRACTOR must immediately (and under no circumstances longer than three (3) calendar days) notify LEA of such expiration of certification or waiver. Total student enrollment shall be limited to capacity as stated on CDE certification. Total student enrollment shall be limited to capacity as stated in Section 25 of the Master Contract. In addition to meeting the certification requirements of the State of California, a CONTRACTOR that operates a program outside of this State shall be certified or licensed by that State to provide, respectively, special education and related services and related services to students under the Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400 et seq.).

If CONTRACTOR is a licensed children’s institution (hereinafter referred to as “LCI”), CONTRACTOR shall be licensed by the State, or other public agency having delegated authority by contract with the State to license, to provide nonmedical care to children, including, but not limited to, individuals with exceptional needs. The LCI must also comply with all licensing requirements relevant to the protection of the child, and have a special permit, if necessary, to meet the needs of each child so placed. If the CONTRACTOR operates a program outside of this State, CONTRACTOR must obtain all required licenses from the appropriate licensing agency in both California and in the State where the LCI is located.

CONTRACTOR’s certification and failure to notify the LEA and CDE of any change in: (1) credentialed/licensed staff; (2) ownership; (3) management and/or control of the agency; (4) major modifications or relocation of facilities; and (5) significant modification of the program, may result in the suspension or revocation of CDE certification and/or suspension or termination of this Master Contract by the SELPA.

3. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS, STATUTES, REGULATIONS During the term of this Master Contract, unless otherwise agreed, CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local statutes, laws, ordinances, rules, policies, and regulations. CONTRACTOR shall also comply with all applicable LEA policies and procedures unless, taking into consideration all of the surrounding facts and circumstances a policy or policies, or a portion of a policy does not reasonably apply to CONTRACTOR, must be specifically agreed to in writing between the CONTRACTOR and LEA. CONTRACTOR hereby acknowledges and agrees that it accepts all risks and responsibilities for its failure to comply with LEA policies and shall indemnify LEA under the provisions of Section 16 of this Agreement for all liability, loss, damage and expense (including reasonable attorney’s fees) resulting from or arising out of CONTRACTOR’s failure to comply with applicable LEA policies (e.g., those policies relating to the provision of special education and/or related services, facilities for individuals with exceptional needs, LEA student enrollment and transfer, LEA student inactive status, corporal punishment, student discipline, and positive behavioral interventions). CONTRACTOR acknowledges and understands that LEA may report to the CDE any violations of the provisions of this Master Contract, and that this may result in the suspension and/or revocation of CDE nonpublic school/agency certification pursuant to California Education Code section 56366.4(a).




4. TERM OF MASTER CONTRACT

The term of this Master Contract shall be from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016 (Title 5 California Code of Regulations section 3062(a)) unless otherwise stated. Neither the CONTRACTOR nor the LEA is required to renew this Master Contract in subsequent contract years. However, the parties acknowledge that any subsequent Master Contract is to be re-negotiated prior to June 30, 2016. In the event a Master Contract is not renegotiated by June 30th, an interim contract may be made available as mutually agreed upon for up to ninety (90) days from July 1 of the new fiscal year (Title 5 California Code of Regulations section 3062(d)). No Master Contract will be offered unless and until all of the contracting requirements have been satisfied. The offer of a Master Contract to a CONTRACTOR is at the sole discretion of the LEA. The provisions of this Master Contract apply to CONTRACTOR and any of its employees or independent contractors. Notice of any change in CONTRACTOR’s ownership or authorized representative shall be provided in writing to LEA within thirty (30) calendar days of change of ownership or change of authorized representative.

5. INTEGRATION/CONTINUANCE OF CONTRACT FOLLOWING EXPIRATION OR TERMINATION This Master Contract includes the LEA procedures and each ISA and they are incorporated herein by this reference. This Master Contract supersedes any prior or contemporaneous written or oral understanding or agreement. This Master Contract may be amended only by written amendment executed by both parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the LEA may modify the LEA procedures from time to time without the consent of CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall provide the LEA with all information as requested in writing to secure a Master Contract or a renewal. At a minimum, such information shall include copies of teacher credentials and clearance, insurance documentation and CDE certification. The LEA may require additional information as applicable. If the application packet is not completed and returned to the LEA, no Master Contract will be issued. If CONTRACTOR does not return the Master Contract to the LEA duly signed by an authorized representative within ninety (90) calendar days of issuance by LEA, the new contract rates will not take effect until the newly executed Master Contract is received by the LEA and will not be retroactive to the first day of the new Master Contract’s effective date. If CONTRACTOR fails to execute the new Master Contract within such ninety (90) day period, all payments shall cease until such time as the new Master Contract for the current school year is signed and returned to the LEA by CONTRACTOR (California Education Code section 56366(c)(1) and (2)). In the event that this Master Contract expires or terminates, CONTRACTOR shall continue to be bound to all of the terms and conditions of the most recent executed Master Contract between CONTRACTOR and LEA for so long as CONTRACTOR is servicing authorized LEA students at the discretion of the LEA.

6. INDIVIDUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT This Master Contract shall include an ISA developed for each LEA student for whom CONTRACTOR is to

provide special education and/or related services. An ISA shall only be issued for LEA students enrolled with the approval of the LEA pursuant to Education Code section 56366(a)(2)(A). An ISA can be effective for more than one contract year provided that there is a concurrent Master Contract in effect. In the event that this Master Contract expires or terminates, CONTRACTOR shall continue to be bound to all of the terms




and conditions of the most recent executed ISAs between CONTRACTOR and LEA for so long as CONTRACTOR is servicing authorized LEA students. Any and all changes to a LEA student’s educational placement/program provided under this Master Contract and/or an ISA shall be made solely on the basis of a revision to the LEA student’s IEP. At any time during the term of this Master Contract, a LEA student’s parent, CONTRACTOR, or LEA may request a review of a LEA student’s IEP subject to all procedural safeguards required by law.

Unless otherwise provided in this Master Contract, the CONTRACTOR shall provide all services specified in the IEP unless the CONTRACTOR and the LEA agree otherwise in the ISA (California Education Code sections 56366(a)(5) and 3062(e)). In the event the CONTRACTOR is unable to provide a specific service at any time during the life of the ISA, the CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA in writing within five (5) business days of the last date a service was provided. CONTRACTOR shall provide any and all subsequent compensatory service hours awarded to LEA student as a result of lack of provision of services while LEA student was served by the nonpublic school or agency. If a parent or LEA contests the termination of an ISA by initiating a due process proceeding with the OAH, CONTRACTOR shall abide by the “stay-put” requirement of State and Federal law unless the parent agrees otherwise or an interim alternative educational placement is deemed lawful and appropriate by the LEA or OAH. CONTRACTOR shall adhere to all the LEA requirements concerning changes in placement.

Disagreements between the LEA and CONTRACTOR concerning the formulation of an ISA or the Master Contract may be appealed to the County Superintendent of Schools of the County where the LEA is located, or the State Superintendent of Public Instruction pursuant to the provisions of California Education Code section 56366(c)(2).

7. DEFINITIONS The following definitions shall apply for purposes of this contract:

a. The term “CONTRACTOR” means a nonpublic, nonsectarian school/agency certified by the California Department of Education and its officers, agents, employees.

b. The term “authorized LEA representative” means a LEA administrator designated to be responsible

for nonpublic school/agency. It is understood that a representative of the Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) of which the LEA is a member is an authorized LEA representative in collaboration with the LEA. The LEA maintains sole responsibility for the Master Contract, unless otherwise specified in the Master Contract.

c. The term “credential” means a valid credential, life diploma, permit, or document in special

education or pupil personnel services issued by, or under the jurisdiction of, the State Board of Education if issued prior to 1970 or the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which entitles the holder thereof to perform services for which certification qualifications are required as defined in Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3001(j).

d. The term "qualified" means that a person holds a certificate, permit or other document equivalent to

that which staff in a public school are required to hold to provide special education and related services, and has met Federal and State certification, licensing, registration, or other comparable requirements which apply to the area in which he or she is providing special education or related services, including those requirements set forth in Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations sections 200.56 and 200.58 and those requirements set forth in Title 5 of the California Code of




Regulations sections 3064 and 3065, or in the absence of such requirements, the State education agency approved or recognized requirements, and adheres to the standards of professional practice established in Federal and State law or regulation, including the standards contained in the California Business and Professions Code. Nothing in this definition shall be construed as restricting the activities of services of a graduate needing direct hours leading to licensure, or of a student teacher or intern leading to a graduate degree at an accredited or approved college or university, as authorized by State laws or regulations (Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3001(y)).

e. The term “license” means a valid non-expired document issued by a licensing agency within the

Department of Consumer Affairs or other State licensing office authorized to grant licenses and authorizing the bearer of the document to provide certain professional services, including but not limited to mental health and board and care services at a residential placement, or refer to themselves using a specified professional title. If a license is not available through an appropriate State licensing agency, a certificate of registration with the appropriate professional organization at the national or State level which has standards established for the certificate that are equivalent to a license, shall be deemed to be a license as defined in Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3001(r).

f. Parent means a biological or adoptive parent unless the biological or adoptive parent does not have

legal authority to make educational decisions for the child, a guardian generally authorized to act as the child’s parent or authorized to make educational decisions for the child, an individual acting in the place of a biological or adoptive parent, including a grandparent, stepparent, or other relative with whom the child lives, or an individual who is legally responsible for the child’s welfare, a surrogate parent, a foster parent if the authority of the biological or adoptive parent to make educational decisions on the child’s behalf has been specifically limited by court order in accordance with Title 34 Code of Federal Regulations section 300.30(b)(1) or (2). Parent does not include the State or any political subdivision of government or the nonpublic school or agency under contract with the LEA for the provision of special education or related services for a child. (California Education Code section 56028).

g. The term “days” means calendar days unless otherwise specified. h. The phrase “billable day” means a school day in which instructional minutes meet or exceed those in

comparable LEA programs. i. The phrase “billable day of attendance” means a school day as defined in California Education Code

section 46307, in which a LEA student is in attendance and in which instructional minutes meet or exceed those in comparable LEA programs unless otherwise stipulated in an IEP or ISA.

j. It is understood that the term “Master Contract” also means “Agreement” and is referred to as such

in this document. k. The term “ERMHS” refers to Educationally Related Mental Health Services.




ADMINISTRATION OF CONTRACT 8. NOTICES

All notices provided for by this Master Contract shall be in writing. Notices shall be mailed by first class mail deposited with the United States Postal Service or delivered by hand and shall be effective as of the date of receipt by addressee.

All notices mailed to the LEA shall be addressed to the person and address as indicated on the signature page of the Master Contract. Notices to CONTRACTOR shall be addressed as indicated on the signature page of this Master Contract.

9. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS

All records shall be maintained by CONTRACTOR as required by State and Federal laws and regulations. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, CONTRACTOR shall maintain all records for at least five (5) years after the termination of this Master Contract. For purposes of this Master Contract, “records” shall include, but not be limited to student records as defined by California Education Code section 49061(b) including electronically stored information; cost data records as set forth in Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3061; registers and roll books of teachers and/or daily service providers; daily service logs and notes and other documents used to record the provision of related services including supervision; daily service logs and notes used to record the provision of services provided through additional instructional assistants, NPA behavioral intervention aides, and bus aides; absence verification records (parent/doctor notes, telephone logs, and related documents) if the CONTRACTOR is funded for excused absences, however, such records are not required if positive attendance is required; bus rosters; staff lists specifying credentials held and documents evidencing other staff qualifications, dates of hire, and dates of termination; records of employee training and certification, staff time sheets; non-paid staff and volunteer sign-in sheets; transportation and other related services subcontracts; school calendars; bell/class schedules when applicable; liability and worker’s compensation insurance policies; State nonpublic school and/or agency certification by-laws; lists of current board of directors/trustees, if incorporated; statement of income and expenses; general journals; case receipts and disbursement books; general ledgers and supporting documents; documents evidencing financial expenditures; Federal/State payroll quarterly reports; and bank statements and canceled checks or facsimile thereof. Positive attendance is required.

CONTRACTOR shall maintain LEA student records in a secure location to ensure confidentiality and

prevent unauthorized access. CONTRACTOR shall maintain a current list of the names and positions of CONTRACTOR’s employees who have access to confidential records. CONTRACTOR shall maintain an access log for each LEA student’s record which lists all persons, agencies, or organizations requesting or receiving information from the record. Such log shall be maintained as required by California Education Code section 49064 and include the name, title, agency/organization affiliation, and date/time of access for each individual requesting or receiving information from the LEA student’s record. Such log needs to record access to the LEA student’s records by: (a) the LEA student’s parent; (b) an individual to whom written consent has been executed by the LEA student’s parent; or (c) employees of LEA or CONTRACTOR having a legitimate educational interest in requesting or receiving information from the record. CONTRACTOR/LEA shall maintain copies of any written parental concerns granting access to student records. For purposes of this paragraph, “employees of LEA or CONTRACTOR” do not include subcontractors. CONTRACTOR shall grant parents access to student records, and comply with parents’ requests for copies of student records, as required by State and Federal laws and regulations. CONTRACTOR agrees, in the event of school or agency closure, to forward all records within ten (10) business days to LEA. These shall include, but not be limited to, current transcripts, IEP/ISPs, and reports.




LEA and/or SELPA shall have access to and receive copies of any and all records upon request within five (5) business days.

10. SEVERABILITY CLAUSE If any provision of this Master Contract is held, in whole or in part, to be unenforceable for any reason, the

remainder of that provision and of the entire Agreement shall be severable and remain in effect. 11. SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST This contract binds CONTRACTOR’s successors and assignees. CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA of

any change of ownership or corporate control within thirty (30) calendar days of change of ownership or change of authorized representative.

12. VENUE AND GOVERNING LAW The laws of the State of California shall govern the terms and conditions of this Master Contract with venue

in the County where the LEA is located. 13. MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LEGAL AND

ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES This Master Contract may be modified or amended by the LEA to conform to administrative and statutory guidelines issued by any State, Federal or local governmental agency. The party seeking such modification shall provide the LEA thirty (30) day notice of any such changes or modifications made to conform to administrative or statutory guidelines and a copy of the statute or regulation upon which the modification or changes are based.

14. TERMINATION This Master Contract or an ISA may be terminated for cause. The cause shall not be the availability of a

public class initiated during the period of the Master Contract or ISA unless the parent agrees to the transfer of the student to the public school program at an IEP team meeting. To terminate the Master Contract, either party shall give twenty (20) days prior written notice to the other party (California Education Code section 56366(a)(4)). At the time of termination, CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA any and all documents CONTRACTOR is required to maintain under this Master Contract. ISAs are void upon termination of this Master Contract, as provided in Section 6. CONTRACTOR or the LEA may also terminate an ISA for cause. To terminate the ISA, either party shall also give twenty (20) days prior written notice to the other.

15. INSURANCE

CONTRACTOR shall, at his, her, or its sole cost and expense, maintain in full force and effect, during the term of this Agreement, the following insurance coverage from a California licensed and/or admitted insurer with an A minus (A-), VII, or better rating from A.M. Best, sufficient to cover any claims, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including counsel fees) arising out of or in connection with CONTRACTOR’s fulfillment of any of its obligations under this Agreement or either party's use of the work or any component or part thereof:




PART I

A. Commercial General Liability Insurance, including both bodily injury and property damage, with limits as follows:

$2,000,000 per occurrence $500,000 fire damage $5,000 medical expenses $1,000,000 personal & adv. injury $3,000,000 general aggregate $2,000,000 products/completed operations aggregate

The policy may not contain an exclusion for coverage of claims arising from claims for sexual molestation or abuse. In the event that CONTRACTOR’s policy should have an exclusion for sexual molestation or abuse claims, then CONTRACTOR shall be required to procure a supplemental policy providing such coverage.

B. Business Auto Liability Insurance for all owned scheduled, non-owned or hired automobiles

with a $1 million combined single limit.

If no owned automobiles, then only hired and non-owned is required.

If CONTRACTOR uses a vehicle to travel to/from school sites, between schools and/or to/from students’ homes or other locations as an approved service location by the LEA, CONTRACTOR must comply with the State of California auto insurance requirements.

C. Workers’ Compensation and Employers Liability Insurance in a form and amount covering

CONTRACTOR’s full liability under the California Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Safety Act and in accordance with applicable State and Federal laws.

Part A - Statutory Limits Part B - $1,000,000/$1,000,000/$1,000,000 Employers Liability

D. Errors and Omissions (E&O)/Malpractice (Professional Liability) coverage, including Sexual Molestation and Abuse coverage, unless that coverage is afforded elsewhere in the Commercial General Liability policy by endorsement or separate policy, with the following limits:

$1,000,000 per occurrence $2,000,000 general aggregate

E. CONTRACTOR, upon execution of this Master Contract and periodically thereafter upon request, shall furnish the LEA with certificates of insurance evidencing required coverage. The certificate of insurance shall include a ten (10) day non-renewal notice provision. The policy shall name the LEA and the CAHELP JPA as additional insured’s in case legal action is brought against the LEA or the CAHELP JPA for actions or negligence of the CONTRACTOR. The Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability policy shall name the LEA and CAHELP JPA as additional insured’s premiums on all insurance policies that shall be paid by CONTRACTOR and shall be deemed included in CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this contract at no additional charge.

F. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions above $100,000 must be declared to and approved by the

LEA. At its option, the LEA may require the CONTRACTOR, at the CONTRACTOR’s sole cost,




to: (a) cause its insurer to reduce to levels specified by the LEA or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions with respect to the LEA, its officials and employees or (b) procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation.

G. For any claims related to the services, the CONTRACTOR’s insurance coverage shall be primary

insurance as respects the LEA, its subsidiaries, officials and employees. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the LEA, its subsidiaries, officials and employees shall be excess of the CONTRACTOR's insurance and shall not contribute with it.

H. All Certificates of Insurance shall reference the contract number, name of the school or agency

submitting the certificate, and the location of the school or agency submitting the certificate on the certificate.

PART II

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPUBLIC SCHOOLS AFFILIATED WITH A RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTER (“RTC)

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school affiliated with a residential treatment center (NPS/RTC), the following insurance policies are required:

A. Commercial General Liability coverage of $3,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 in

General Aggregate. The policy shall be endorsed to name the LEA and the Board of Education as named additional insured and shall provide specifically that any insurance carried by the LEA which may be applicable to any claims or loss shall be deemed excess and the RTC’s insurance primary despite any conflicting provisions in the RTC’s policy. Coverage shall be maintained with no Self-Insured Retention above $100,000 without the prior written approval of the LEA.

B. Workers’ Compensation Insurance in accordance with provisions of the California Labor Code adequate to protect the RTC from claims that may arise from its operations pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act (Statutory Coverage). The Workers’ Compensation Insurance coverage must also include Employers Liability coverage with limits of $1,000,000/$1,000,000/$1,000,000.

C. Commercial Auto Liability coverage with limits of $1,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence if the RTC does not operate a student bus service. If the RTC provides student bus services, the required coverage limit is $5,000,000 Combined Single Limit per occurrence.

D. Fidelity Bond or Crime Coverage shall be maintained by the RTC to cover all employees who process or otherwise have responsibility for RTC funds, supplies, equipment or other assets. Minimum amount of coverage shall be $25,000 per occurrence, with no Self-Insured Retention.

E. Professional Liability/Errors & Omissions/Malpractice coverage with minimum limits of $3,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 general aggregate.

F. Sexual Molestation and Abuse Coverage unless that coverage is afforded elsewhere in the Commercial General Liability or Professional Liability policy by endorsement, with minimum limits of $3,000,000 per occurrence and $6,000,000 general aggregate.

If the LEA or CONTRACTOR determines that changes in insurance coverage obligations under this section is necessary, either party may reopen negotiations to modify the insurance obligations.




If any of the policies required to be maintained under these insurance requirements are written on a claims-made basis, the following shall apply:

1. The retroactive date must be shown, and must be before the date of this agreement or the beginning of services to be performed.

2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the services.

3. If coverage is cancelled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date prior to this agreement, the RTC must purchase an extended reporting period for a minimum of five (5) years after the completion of services or the termination of this agreement.

4. Upon request, a copy of the claims-made reporting requirements must be submitted to the LEA for review.

16. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS

To the fullest extent allowed by law, CONTRACTOR shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless LEA and its Board members, administrators, employees, agents, attorneys, volunteers, and subcontractors (LEA Indemnities) harmless against all liability, loss, damage and expense (including reasonable attorney’s fees) resulting from or arising out of this Master Contract or its performance, to the extent that such loss, expense, damage, or liability was proximately caused by the negligent or willful act or omission of CONTRACTOR, including without limitation, its agents, employees, subcontractors or anyone employed directly or indirectly by it (excluding LEA and LEA Indemnities). To the fullest extent allowed by law, LEA shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless CONTRACTOR and its Board members, administrators, employees, agents, attorneys, and subcontractors (CONTRACTOR Indemnities) harmless against all liability, loss, damage, and expense (including reasonable attorney’s fees) resulting from or arising out of this Master Contract or its performance, to the extent that such loss, expense, damage or liability was proximately caused by the negligent or willful act or omission of LEA, including, without limitation, its agents, employees, subcontractors or anyone employed directly or indirectly by it (excluding CONTRACTOR and/or any CONTRACTOR Indemnities). LEA represents that it is self-insured in compliance with the laws of the State of California, that the self-insurance covers LEA employees acting within the course and scope of their respective duties and that its self-insurance covers LEA’s indemnification obligations under this Master Contract.

17. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Nothing herein contained shall be construed to imply a joint venture, partnership or principal-agent

relationship between the LEA and CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall provide all services under this Agreement as an independent contractor, and neither party shall have the authority to bind or make any commitment on behalf of the other. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to create any association, partnership, joint venture or relationship of principal and agent, master and servant, or employer and employee between the parties or any affiliates of the parties, or between the LEA and any individual assigned by CONTRACTOR to perform any services for the LEA.

If the LEA is held to be a partner, joint venturer, co-principal, employer or co-employer of CONTRACTOR,

CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless the LEA from and against any and all claims for loss,




liability, or damages arising from that holding, as well as any expenses, costs, taxes, penalties and interest charges incurred by the LEA as a result of that holding.

18. SUBCONTRACTING

CONTRACTOR shall provide written notification to the LEA before subcontracting for special education and/or related services pursuant to this Master Contract. In the event the LEA determines that it can provide the subcontracted service(s) at a lower rate, the LEA may elect to provide such service(s). If the LEA elects to provide such service(s), the LEA shall provide written notification to the CONTRACOR within five (5) days of receipt of CONTRACTOR’s original notice and CONTRACTOR shall not subcontract for said service(s). CONTRACTOR shall incorporate all of the provisions of this Master Contract in all subcontracts, to the fullest extent reasonably possible unless written approval for any change is first obtained by the LEA. Any subcontract of the work contemplated under this Agreement without the express written approval from the LEA shall be considered a material breach of the Agreement and the LEA shall have the rights under the law for that material breach. Furthermore, when CONTRACTOR enters into subcontracts for the provision of special education and/or related services (including without limitation transportation) for any LEA student, CONTRACTOR shall cause each subcontractor to procure and maintain insurance during the term of each subcontract. Such subcontractor’s insurance shall comply with the provisions of Section 15. Each subcontractor shall furnish the LEA with original endorsements and certificates of insurance effecting coverage required by Section 15. The endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The endorsements are to be on forms provided by the LEA. All endorsements are to be received and approved by the LEA before the subcontractor’s work commences. The Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability policies shall name the LEA/CAHELP JPA as additional insured. As an alternative to the LEA's forms, a subcontractor’s insurer may provide complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by this Master Contract. All Certificates of Insurance shall reference the LEA contract number, name of the school or agency submitting the certificate, indication if nonpublic school or nonpublic agency, and the location of the school or agency submitting the certificate. In addition, all sub-contractors must meet the requirements as contained in Section 46 (Clearance Requirements) and Section 47 (Staff Qualifications) of this Master Contract. CONTRACTOR shall provide for the insurance provider to send written notice of cancellation to the LEA/CAHELP JPA at least forty-five (45) days prior to cancelation or material change in coverage.

19. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA a copy of its current bylaws and a current list of its Board of

Directors (or Trustees), if it is incorporated. CONTRACTOR and any member of its Board of Directors (or Trustees) shall disclose and refrain from any relationship with the LEA that constitutes or may constitute a conflict of interest pursuant to California Education Code section 56042 including, but not limited to, employment with LEA, provision of private party assessments and/or reports, and attendance at IEP team meetings acting as a student’s advocate. Pursuant to California Education Code section 56042, an attorney or advocate for a parent of an individual with exceptional needs shall not recommend placement at CONTRACTOR’s facility if the attorney or advocate is employed or contracted by the CONTRACTOR, or will receive a benefit from the CONTRACTOR, or otherwise has a conflict of interest.

Unless CONTRACTOR and the LEA otherwise agree in writing, the LEA shall neither execute an ISA with CONTRACTOR nor amend an existing ISA for a LEA student when a recommendation for special education and/or related services is based in whole or in part on assessment(s) or reports provided by the




CONTRACTOR to the LEA student without prior written authorization by LEA. This paragraph shall apply to CONTRACTOR regardless of when an assessment is performed or a report is prepared (i.e., before or after the LEA student is enrolled in CONTRACTOR’s school/agency) or whether an assessment of the LEA student is performed or a report is prepared in the normal course of the services provided to the LEA student by the CONTRACTOR. To avoid a conflict of interest, and in order to ensure the appropriateness of an Independent Educational Evaluation (hereinafter referred to as “IEE”) and its recommendations, the LEA may, in its discretion, not fund an IEE by an evaluator who provides ongoing service(s) or is sought to provide service(s) to the LEA student for whom the IEE is requested. Likewise, the LEA may, in its discretion, not fund services through the evaluator whose IEE the LEA agrees to fund. When no other appropriate assessor is available, the LEA may request and if CONTRACTOR agrees, the CONTRACTOR may provide an IEE. When the CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency, the CONTRACTOR acknowledges that its authorized representative has read and understands Education Code section 56366.3 which provides, in relevant part, that no special education and/or related services provided by CONTRACTOR shall be paid for by the LEA if provided by an individual who was an employee of the LEA within the three hundred and sixty five (365) days prior to executing this Master Contract. This provision does not apply to any person who is able to provide related services during the extended school year because he or she is otherwise employed for up to ten months of the school year by the LEA.

20. NON-DISCRIMINATION

CONTRACTOR shall not unlawfully discriminate on the basis of gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, age, sexual orientation, or disability or any other classification protected by Federal or State law, in employment or operation of its programs.

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM 21. DISPUTE RESOLUTION

In the event of a disagreement regarding the distribution of funding, responsibility for service provision and any other activities specified within this Master Contract, it is the intent of the CAHELP JPA that issues be resolved at the lowest level possible. The CAHELP JPA Governance Council is considered to be the board of last resort. This policy is intended to resolve disagreements within a period of forty-five (45) days, but is not intended to undermine local authority. If LEA or CONTRACTOR, including those that are out-of-geographic boundaries, disagree with a decision or practice of another agency or the SELPA office that LEA or CONTRACTOR has a responsibility to discuss and attempt resolution of the disagreement with the party, or parties, directly involved. The parties involved will present issues to their respective superintendent/CDE, or designee, who will attempt to resolve the matter. Either party may request the direct assistance of the SELPA Administrator, or his/her designee, or the services of a neutral mediator from outside the CAHELP JPA. In the event the issue cannot be resolved either party may request review by the SELPA Administrator, or his/her designee. If the issue cannot be resolved with the recommendation of the SELPA Administrator, either party may request that the issue be placed on the agenda of the CAHELP JPA Governance Council for a hearing on the issues and ultimate resolution. The decision of the CAHELP JPA Governance Council shall be final. If any legal action or proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement is brought by either party to this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive from the other party, in addition to any other




relief that may be granted, their reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses incurred in the action or proceeding by the prevailing party.

22. FREE AND APPROPRIATE PUBLIC EDUCATION LEA shall provide CONTRACTOR with a copy of the IEP including the Individualized Transition Plan

(hereinafter referred to as “ITP”) of each LEA student served by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall provide to each LEA student special education and/or related services (including transition services) within the nonpublic school or nonpublic agency consistent with the LEA student’s IEP and as specified in the ISA. If CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall not accept a LEA student if it cannot provide or ensure the provision of the services outlined in the LEA student’s IEP. If student services are provided by a third party (i.e., Related Services Provider), CONTRACTOR shall notify LEA if provision of services cease.

Unless otherwise agreed to between CONTRACTOR and LEA, CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for the provision of all appropriate supplies, equipment, and/or facilities for LEA students, as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA. CONTRACTOR shall make no charge of any kind to parents for special education and/or related services as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA (including, but not limited to, screenings, assessments to include translation of such written assessment reports when required, or interviews that occur prior to or as a condition of the LEA student’s enrollment under the terms of this Master Contract). CONTRACTOR shall ensure that facilities are adequate to provide LEA students with an environment, which meets all pertinent health and safety regulations. CONTRACTOR may charge a LEA student’s parent(s) for services and/or activities not necessary for the LEA student to receive a free appropriate public education after: (a) written notification to the LEA student’s parent(s) of the cost and voluntary nature of the services and/or activities; and (b) receipt by the LEA of the written notification and a written acknowledgment signed by the LEA student’s parent(s) of the cost and voluntary nature of the services and/or activities. CONTRACTOR shall adhere to all LEA requirements concerning parent acknowledgment of financial responsibility as specified in the LEA procedures. Voluntary services and/or activities not necessary for the LEA student to receive a free appropriate public education shall not interfere with the LEA student’s receipt of special education and/or related services as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA unless the LEA and CONTRACTOR agree otherwise in writing.

23. GENERAL PROGRAM OF INSTRUCTION All nonpublic school and nonpublic agency services shall be provided consistent with the area of certification

specified by CDE certification and as defined in California Education Code section 56366 et seq. and shall ensure that facilities are adequate to provide LEA students with an environment, which meets all pertinent health and safety regulations.

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR’s general program of instruction shall: (a)

utilize evidence-based practices and predictors and be consistent with LEA’s standards regarding the particular course of study and curriculum; (b) include curriculum that addresses mathematics, literacy and the use of educational, assistive technology and transition services; (c) be consistent with CDE’s standards regarding the particular course of study and curriculum; and (d) provide the services as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA. LEA students shall have access to: (a) State Board of Education (SBE) - adopted Common Core State Standards (“CCSS”) for curriculum and the same instructional materials for kindergarten and grades 1 to 8, inclusive; and provide standards - aligned core curriculum and instructional materials for grades 9 to 12, inclusive, used by a LEA, that contracts with the nonpublic school; (b) college preparation courses; (c) extracurricular activities, such as art, sports, music and academic clubs; (d) career preparation and vocational training, consistent with transition plans pursuant to State and Federal law; and




(e) supplemental assistance, including individual academic tutoring, psychological counseling, and career and college counseling. CONTRACTOR’s general program of instruction shall be described in writing and a copy provided to the LEA prior to the effective date of this Master Contract.

When CONTRACTOR serves LEA students in grades 9 through 12 inclusive, LEA shall provide to CONTRACTOR a specific list of the course requirements to be satisfied by the CONTRACTOR leading toward graduation or completion of LEA’s diploma requirements. CONTRACTOR shall not award a high school diploma to LEA students who have not successfully completed all of the LEA’s graduation requirements, including, but not limited to, passing the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) if applicable or meeting CAHSEE exception/wavier requirements per State guidelines. At the close of each semester for LEA students in grades 9 through 12 inclusive, CONTRACTOR shall prepare transcripts and submit them to the student’s LEA of Residence for evaluation of progress toward completion of diploma or certificate of completion requirements. The LEA shall issue the high school diploma or certificate of completion to LEA students. When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency and/or related services provider, CONTRACTOR’s general program of instruction and/or services shall utilize evidence-based practices and predictors and be consistent with LEA and CDE guidelines and certification, and provided as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA. The nonpublic agency providing Behavioral Intervention services shall develop a written treatment plan that specifies the nature of their nonpublic agency service for each LEA student within thirty (30) days of enrollment and shall be provided in writing to the LEA. School-based services may not be unilaterally converted by the CONTRACTOR to a substitute program or provided at a location not specifically authorized by the IEP team. Except for services provided by a contractor that is an LCI, all services not provided in the school setting require the presence of a parent, guardian or adult caregiver during the delivery of services, provided such guardian or caregiver have a signed authorization by the parent or legal guardian to authorize emergency services as requested. LCI contractors shall ensure that appropriate and qualified residential or clinical staff is present during the provision of services under this Master Contract. CONTRACTOR shall immediately notify LEA in writing if no parent, guardian or adult caregiver is present. CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA a written description of the services and location provided prior to the effective date of this Master Contract. CONTRACTORs providing behavioral intervention services must have a trained Behavior Intervention Manager or trained equivalent on staff. It is understood that behavior intervention services are limited per CDE certification and do not constitute as an instructional program. When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency, CONTRACTOR shall not provide transportation nor subcontract for transportation services for students unless the LEA and CONTRACTOR agree otherwise in writing.

24. INSTRUCTIONAL MINUTES

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, the total number of instructional minutes per school day provided by CONTRACTOR shall be at least equivalent to the number of instructional minutes per school day provided to LEA students at like grade level, attending LEA schools and shall be specified in the LEA student’s ISA developed in accordance with the LEA student’s IEP. For LEA students in grades kindergarten through 12, unless otherwise specified in the LEA student's IEP and ISA, the number of instructional minutes, excluding breakfast, recess, lunch, and passing time, shall be at least 314 instructional minutes or alternate weekly total number of minutes shall be at least 1570.

The total number of annual instructional minutes shall be at least equivalent to the total number of annual instructional minutes provided to LEA students attending LEA schools in like grade levels unless otherwise specified in the LEA student’s IEP.




When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency and/or related services provider, the total number of minutes per school day provided by CONTRACTOR shall be specified in the LEA student’s ISA developed in accordance with the LEA student’s IEP.

25. CLASS SIZE When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall ensure that class size shall not exceed a

ratio of one teacher to a maximum of fourteen (14) students. In the event a nonpublic school is unable to fill a vacant teaching position responsible for direct instruction to

students, and the vacancy has direct impact on the CDE certification of that school, the nonpublic school shall develop a plan to assure appropriate coverage of students by first utilizing existing certificated staff. The nonpublic school and the LEA may agree to one thirty (30) school day period per contract year where class size may be increased to assure coverage by an appropriately credentialed teacher. Such an agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. This provision does not apply to a nonpublic agency.

CONTRACTOR providing special education instruction for individuals with exceptional needs between the

ages of three and five years, inclusive, shall also comply with the appropriate instructional adult to child ratios pursuant to California Education Code section 56440 et seq.

26. CALENDARS

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall submit to the LEA/CAHELP JPA a school calendar with the total number of billable days not to exceed 180 days, plus twenty (20) extended school year billable days equivalent to the number of days determined by the LEA’s extended school year calendar. Billable days shall include only those days that are included on the submitted and approved school calendar, and/or required by the IEP (developed by the LEA) for each student. CONTRACTOR shall not be allowed to change its school calendar and/or amend the number of billable days without the prior written approval of the LEA. Nothing in this Master Contract shall be interpreted to require the LEA to accept any requests for calendar changes. Unless otherwise specified by the students’ IEP, educational services shall occur at the school site. A student shall only be eligible for extended school year services if such are recommended by his/her IEP team and the provision of such is specifically included in the ISA. Extended school year shall consist of twenty (20) instructional days, unless otherwise agreed upon by the IEP team convened by the LEA. Any days of extended school year in excess of twenty (20) billable days must be mutually agreed to, in writing, prior to the start of the extended school year. The student must have actually been in attendance during the regular school year and/or during extended school year and actually received services on a billable day of attendance in order for CONTRACTOR to be eligible for payment. It is specifically understood that services may not be provided on weekends/holidays and other times when school is not in session, unless agreed to by the LEA, in writing, in advance of the delivery of any nonpublic school service. Any instructional days provided without this written agreement shall be at the sole financial responsibility of the CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall observe the same legal holidays as the LEA. Those holidays are Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day and Independence Day. With the approval of the LEA, CONTRACTOR may revise the date upon which CONTRACTOR closes in observance of any of the holidays observed by LEA.




When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency, CONTRACTOR shall be provided with a LEA-developed/approved calendar prior to the initiation of services. CONTRACTOR herein agrees to observe holidays as specified in the LEA-developed/approved calendar. CONTRACTOR shall provide services pursuant to the LEA-developed/approved calendar; or as specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA. Unless otherwise specified in the LEA student’s ISA, CONTRACTOR shall provide related services to LEA students on only those days that the LEA student’s school of attendance is in session and the LEA student attends school. CONTRACTOR shall bill only for services provided on billable days of attendance as indicated on the LEA calendar unless CONTRACTOR and the LEA agree otherwise, in writing. LEA student must have actually been in attendance and/or received services on a billable day of attendance in order for CONTRACTOR to be eligible for payment. It is specifically understood that services may not be provided on weekends/holidays and other times when school is not in session, unless agreed to by the LEA, in writing, in advance of the delivery of any nonpublic agency service provided by CONTRACTOR. Any instructional days provided without this written agreement shall be at the sole financial responsibility of the CONTRACTOR.

27. DATA REPORTING CONTRACTOR shall agree to provide to the LEA, all data related to LEA student information and billing

information with LEA. CONTRACTOR shall agree to provide all data related to any and all sections of this Master Contract and requested by and in the format required by the LEA. It is understood that all nonpublic schools and nonpublic agencies shall utilize the Web IEP System or comparable system approved by the LEA/CAHELP JPA for all IEP development and progress reporting. Additional progress reporting may be required by the LEA. The LEA shall provide the CONTRACTOR with appropriate software, user training and proper internet permissions to allow adequate access.

The LEA shall provide the CONTRACTOR with approved forms and/or format for such data including but

not limited to invoicing, attendance reports and progress reports. The LEA may approve use of CONTRACTOR-provided forms at their discretion.

28. LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT/DUAL ENROLLMENT CONTRACTOR and the LEA shall both follow all LEA policies and procedures that support Least

Restrictive Environment (“LRE”) options (and/or dual enrollment options if available and appropriate) for students to have access to the general curriculum and to be educated with their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate.

CONTRACTOR shall ensure that LRE placement options are addressed at all IEP team meetings regarding

LEA students for whom ISAs have been or may be executed. This shall include IEP team consideration of supplementary aids and services and goals and objectives necessary for placement in the LRE and necessary to enable students to transition to less restrictive settings.

When an IEP team has determined that a LEA student should be transitioned into the public school setting, CONTRACTOR shall assist in implementing the IEP team’s recommended activities to support transition which may include, but not be limited to, facilitation of dual enrollment, scheduling, transportation arrangements and other student supports. Additionally, that these provisions shall also apply to mediated agreements and OAH decisions. CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA should the LEA student show progress is not being made and shall request an IEP team meeting with the LEA to discuss the appropriate LRE. Conversely, should the LEA student show improvement in his/her educational placement, CONTRACTOR shall call an IEP team meeting with the LEA to decide on the appropriate LRE.




29. STATEWIDE ACHIEVEMENT TESTING AND HIGH SCHOOL EXIT EXAMINATION When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, per implementation of Senate Bill 484, CONTRACTOR shall

administer all Statewide assessments within the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (“CAASPP”), Desired Results Developmental Profile (“DRDP”), achievement and abilities tests (using LEA-authorized assessment instruments), the FITNESSGRAM® (physical fitness test), California English Language Development (“CELDT”), and the California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), as appropriate to the student, and mandated by LEA pursuant to LEA and State and Federal guidelines.

CONTRACTOR is subject to the alternative accountability system developed pursuant to Education Code

section 52052, in the same manner as public schools. Each LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR by the LEA shall be tested by qualified staff of the CONTRACTOR in accordance with that accountability program. LEA shall provide test administration training to CONTRACTOR’s qualified staff. CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA test training and comply with completion of all coding requirements as required by LEA.

Where CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall administer all statewide achievement tests and the California High School Exit Examination as mandated by the LEA and pursuant to the LEA, State and Federal guidelines.

30. MANDATED ATTENDANCE AT MEETINGS

CONTRACTOR shall attend LEA/CAHELP JPA mandated meetings when legal mandates, and/or LEA policy and procedures are reviewed, including but not limited to the areas of: curriculum, high school graduation, standards-based instruction, behavior intervention, cultural and linguistic needs of students with disabilities, dual enrollment responsibilities, LRE responsibilities, transition services, and standardized testing and IEPs. The LEA shall provide CONTRACTOR with reasonable notice of mandated meetings. Attendance at such meetings shall not constitute a billable service hour(s).

31. POSITIVE BEHAVIOR INTERVENTIONS

CONTRACTOR shall comply with the requirements of Education Code section 56521.5 regarding positive behavioral interventions. LEA students who exhibit serious behavioral challenges must receive timely and appropriate assessments and positive supports and interventions in accordance with the Federal law and its implementing regulations. If the IEP team determines that a LEA student’s behavior impedes his or her learning or the learning of others, the IEP team is required to consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address that behavior, consistent with section 1414(d)(3)(B)(i) and (d)(4) of Title 20 of the United States Code and associated Federal regulations. This could mean that instead of developing a Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP), the IEP team may conclude it is sufficient to address the LEA student’s behavioral problems through the development of behavioral goals and behavioral interventions to support those goals.

CONTRACTOR shall maintain a written policy pursuant to California Education Code section 56521.1 regarding emergency interventions and Behavioral Emergency Reports (“BER”). Evidence of such training shall be submitted to the LEA at the beginning of the school year and within six (6) days of any new hire. CONTRACTOR shall ensure that all of its staff members are trained as required in crisis intervention and emergency procedures as related to appropriate behavioral management strategies. Training includes certification with an approved SELPA crisis intervention program.




Pursuant to Education Code section 56521.1 emergency interventions shall not be used as a substitute for a BIP, and instead may only be used to control behavior that is unpredictable and spontaneous. For an emergency intervention to be used, the behavior must pose a clear and present danger of serious physical harm to the individual with exceptional needs, or others. Before emergency interventions may be applied, the behavior must be of the kind that cannot be immediately prevented by a response less restrictive than the temporary application of a technique used to contain the behavior. Emergency interventions shall not be employed longer than necessary to contain the behavior. If a situation requires prolonged use of emergency intervention, staff must seek assistance from the school site administrator or a law enforcement agency. CONTRACTOR may complete their own incident report for events that do not meet emergency intervention requirements. CONTRACTOR shall complete a Behavioral Emergency Report (“BER”) when an emergency occurs that is defined as a serious, dangerous behavior that staff has determined to present a clear and present danger to others. It requires a non-violent physical intervention to protect the safety of student, self, or others and a physical intervention has been used; or a physical intervention has not been used, but an injury or serious property damage has occurred. Personal Safety Techniques may or may not have been used. Emergencies require a BER form be completed and submitted to the LEA within twenty-four (24) hours for administrative action. CONTRACTOR shall notify parent within twenty-four (24) hours via telephone. If the LEA student does not have a BIP or Positive Behavioral Intervention Plan (PBIP), an IEP team shall schedule a meeting to review the BER, determine if there is a necessity for a functional behavioral assessment (FBA), and to determine an interim plan. If the LEA student already has a BIP, the IEP team shall review and modify the BIP if a new serious behavior has been exhibited or existing behavioral interventions have proven to be ineffective. CONTRACTOR shall schedule with the LEA an IEP meeting within two (2) days.

CONTRACTOR shall not authorize, order, consent to, or pay for any of the following prohibited

interventions, or any other intervention similar to or like the following: (a) any intervention that is designed to, or likely to, cause physical pain; (b) releasing noxious, toxic, or otherwise unpleasant sprays, mists, or substances in proximity to the LEA student’s face; (c) any intervention which denies adequate sleep, food, water, shelter, bedding, physical comfort, or access to bathroom facilities; (d) any intervention which is designed to subject, used to subject, or likely to subject the LEA student to verbal abuse, ridicule, or humiliation, or which can be expected to cause excessive emotional trauma; (e) restrictive interventions which employ a device, material, or objects that simultaneously immobilize all four extremities, including the procedure known as prone containment, except that prone containment or similar techniques may be used as a short term emergency intervention by CONTRACTOR’s trained and qualified personnel as allowable by applicable law and regulations; (f) locked seclusion except as allowable by applicable law and regulations; (g) any intervention that precludes adequate supervision of individual; and (h) any intervention which deprives the LEA student of one or more of his or her senses, pursuant to California Education Code section 56521.1 and 56521.2.

32. STUDENT DISCIPLINE CONTRACTOR shall maintain and abide by a written policy for LEA student discipline that is consistent

with State and Federal law and regulations.

When CONTRACTOR seeks to remove a LEA student from his/her current educational placement for disciplinary reasons, CONTRACTOR shall immediately submit a written discipline report to the LEA and a manifestation IEP team meeting shall be scheduled. Written discipline reports shall include, but not be limited to: the LEA student’s name; the time, date, and description of the misconduct; the disciplinary action taken by CONTRACTOR; and the rationale for such disciplinary action. A copy of the LEA student’s behavioral plan, if any, shall be submitted with the written discipline report. CONTRACTOR and LEA agree




to participate in a manifestation determination at an IEP meeting no later than the tenth (10th) day of suspension. CONTRACTOR shall notify and invite LEA representatives to the IEP team meeting where the manifestation determination will be made.

33. IEP TEAM MEETINGS An IEP team meeting shall be convened at least annually to evaluate: (1) the educational progress of each

LEA student placed with CONTRACTOR, including all State assessment results pursuant to the requirements of Education Code section 52052; (2) whether or not the needs of the LEA student continue to be best met at the nonpublic school; and (3) whether changes to the LEA student’s IEP are necessary, including whether the LEA student may be transitioned to a public school setting (California Education Code sections 56366(a)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) and pursuant to Education Code section 56345 (b)(4)).

If a LEA student is to be transferred from a nonpublic school setting into a regular class setting in a public

school for any part of the school day, the IEP team shall document, if appropriate, a description of activities provided to integrate the LEA student into the regular education program, including the nature of each activity as well as the time spent on the activity each day or week and a description of the activities provided to support the transition of the LEA student from the special education program into the regular education program. Each LEA student shall be allowed to provide confidential input to any representative of his or her IEP team. Except as otherwise provided in the Master Contract, CONTRACTOR and the LEA shall participate in all IEP team meetings regarding LEA students for whom ISAs have been or may be executed. At any time during the term of this Master Contract, a parent, the CONTRACTOR or the LEA may request a review of the LEA student’s IEP, subject to all procedural safeguards required by law, including reasonable notice given to, and participation of, the CONTRACTOR in the meeting. Every effort shall be made to schedule IEP team meetings at a time and place that is mutually convenient to the parent(s), the CONTRACTOR and the LEA. CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA any and all assessments (including testing protocols) and written assessment reports and translations of such written assessment reports when required, created by CONTRACTOR and any of its agents or subcontractors, upon request and/or pursuant to LEA policy and procedures. It is understood that attendance at the IEP meeting is part of CONTRACTOR’S professional responsibility and is not a billable service under this Master Contract.

It is understood that the CONTRACTOR shall utilize the Web IEP System for all IEP planning and progress

reporting. The CAHELP JPA shall provide training for any nonpublic school and nonpublic agency to assure access to Web IEP. The nonpublic school and/or nonpublic agency shall maintain confidentiality of all IEP data on the Web IEP System and shall protect the password requirements of the system. When a LEA student disenrolls from the nonpublic school or stops receiving services from the nonpublic agency, such CONTRACTOR shall discontinue use of the Web IEP System for that LEA student.

Changes in any LEA student’s educational program, including instruction, services, or instructional setting, provided under this Master Contract may only be made on the basis of revisions to the LEA student’s IEP. In the event that the CONTRACTOR believes the LEA student requires a change of placement, the CONTRACTOR may request a review of the LEA student’s IEP for the purposes of considering a change in the student’s placement. LEA student is entitled to remain in the last agreed upon and implemented placement unless parent agrees otherwise or unless an interim alternative educational placement is deemed lawful and appropriate by the LEA or OAH. If no parent or guardian can attend the IEP team meeting, the CONTRACTOR with support of the LEA, shall use other methods to ensure parent or guardian participation, including individual or conference telephone calls. In the event a parent or guardian cannot attend the IEP meeting either physically or through other methods, a meeting may be conducted without a parent or guardian in attendance. If the CONTRACTOR or LEA is unable to convince the parent or guardian that he or she should attend, the




CONTRACTOR shall maintain a written record of its attempts to arrange a mutually agreed upon time and place. The CONTRACTOR and LEA shall also take any action necessary to ensure that the parent or guardian understands the proceedings at a meeting, including arranging for an interpreter. There must be documentation of parent consent to the IEP obtained via telephone or by written signature before payment can be made for the services rendered.

34. SURROGATE PARENTS CONTRACTOR shall comply with all LEA surrogate parent assignments. 35. DUE PROCESS PROCEEDINGS

CONTRACTOR shall fully participate in special education due process proceedings including mediations and hearings, as requested by the LEA. CONTRACTOR shall also fully participate in the investigation and provision of documentation related to any complaint filed with the State of California, the Office for Civil Rights, or any other State and/or Federal governmental body or agency. Full participation shall include, but in no way be limited to, cooperating with LEA representatives to provide complete answers raised by any investigator and/or the immediate provision of any and all documentation that pertains to the operation of CONTRACTOR’s program and/or the implementation of a particular LEA student’s ISP.

36. COMPLAINT PROCEDURES CONTRACTOR shall maintain and adhere to its written procedures for responding to parent complaints.

These procedures shall include annually notifying and providing parents of LEA students with appropriate information (including complaint forms) for the following: (1) Uniform Complaint Procedures pursuant to Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 4600 et seq.; (2) Nondiscrimination policies pursuant to Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 4960 (a); (3) Sexual Harassment Policies pursuant to California Education Code section 231.5(a)(b)(c); (4) Student Grievance Procedure pursuant to Title IX 106.8 (a)(d) and 106.9 (a); and (5) Notice of Privacy Practices in compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA). CONTRACTOR shall include verification of these procedures to the LEA.

37. STUDENT PROGRESS REPORTS/REPORT CARDS AND ASSESSMENTS

Unless the LEA requests in writing that progress reports be provided on a monthly basis, CONTRACTOR shall provide to parents at least four (4) written progress reports/report cards. At a minimum, progress reports shall include progress over time towards IEP goals and objectives. A copy of the progress reports/report cards shall be maintained at the CONTRACTOR’s place of business and shall be submitted to the LEA student’s parent(s) within ten (10) days of the LEA’s request.

CONTRACTOR shall also provide an LEA representative access to supporting documentation used to determine progress on any goal or objective, including but not limited to log sheets, observation notes, data sheets, pre/posttests, rubrics and other similar data collection used to determine progress or lack of progress on approved goals, objectives, transition plans or behavioral intervention plans. The LEA may request copies of such data at any time within five (5) years of the date of service. CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain the information for at least five (5) years and also shall provide this data supporting progress within five (5) business days of request. Additional time may be granted as needed by the LEA.

CONTRACTOR shall complete academic or other assessment of the LEA student one month prior to the LEA student’s annual or triennial review IEP team meeting for the purpose of reporting the LEA student’s present levels of performance at the IEP team meeting as required by State and Federal laws and regulations




and pursuant to LEA policies, procedures, and/or practices. CONTRACTOR shall provide sufficient copies of its reports, documents, and projected goals to share with members of the IEP team five (5) business days prior to the IEP meeting. CONTRACTOR shall maintain supporting documentation such as test protocols and data collection, which shall be made available to LEA within five (5) business days of request. CONTRACTOR is responsible for all assessment costs regarding the updating of goals and objectives, progress reporting and the development of present levels of performance. All assessments shall be provided by the LEA unless the LEA specifies in writing a request that CONTRACTOR perform such additional assessment. Any assessment costs may be added to the ISA and/or approved separately by the LEA at the LEA’s sole discretion. CONTRACTOR understands and accepts that CONTRACTOR is also responsible for the costs of translation for all written assessment reports when requested by the parent and when required. It is understood that all billable hours must be in direct services to students as specified in the ISA. For nonpublic agency services, supervision provided by a qualified individual as specified in Title 5 Regulation, subsection 3065, shall be determined as appropriate and included in the ISA. Supervision means the direct observation of services, data review, case conferencing and program design consistent with professional standards for each professional’s license, certification, or credential. CONTRACTOR shall not charge the LEA student’s parent(s) or LEA for the provision of progress reports, report cards, and/or any assessments and translations of such written assessment reports when requested and when required, interviews, or meetings. It is understood that all billable hours have limits to those specified on the ISA consistent with the IEP. It is understood that copies of data collection notes, forms, charts and other such data are part of the LEA student’s record and shall be made available to the LEA upon written request.

38. TRANSCRIPTS

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall prepare transcripts at the close of each semester, or upon LEA student transfer, for LEA students in grades 9 through 12 inclusive. CONTRACTOR shall submit all transcripts on LEA approved forms to the LEA student’s school of residence, for evaluation of progress toward completion of diploma requirements as specified in LEA procedures. CONTRACTOR shall submit to the LEA names of LEA students and their schools of residence for whom transcripts have been submitted as specified by the LEA.

39. STUDENT CHANGE OF RESIDENCE Upon enrollment, CONTRACTOR shall notify parents in writing of their obligation to notify

CONTRACTOR of the LEA student’s change of residence. CONTRACTOR shall maintain, and provide upon request by LEA, documentation of such notice to parents. Within five (5) school days after CONTRACTOR becomes aware of a LEA student’s change of residence, CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA, in writing, of the LEA student’s change of residence.

If CONTRACTOR had knowledge or should reasonably have had knowledge of the LEA student’s change of

residence boundaries and CONTRACTOR fails to follow the procedures specified in this provision, the LEA shall not be responsible for the costs of services delivered after the LEA student’s change of residence.

If an LEA student is enrolled in the nonpublic school without the LEA’s knowledge, the CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA within twenty-four (24) hours. Failure to notify the LEA within twenty-four (24) hours may result in a delay or forfeiture of reimbursement to the CONTRACTOR.




40. WITHDRAWAL OF LEA STUDENT FROM PROGRAM

CONTRACTOR shall immediately report electronically and in writing to the LEA within five (5) business days when a LEA student is withdrawn without prior notice from school and/or services, including LEA student’s change of residence to a residence outside of LEA service boundaries, and LEA student’s discharge against professional advice from a Nonpublic School/Residential Treatment Center (“NPS/RTC”). CONTRACTOR shall assist LEA to verify and clear potential dropouts three times per year, as required by the 2001 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (No Child Left Behind; NCLB), as documentation of graduation rate is one of the indicators of Adequate Yearly Progress (“AYP”).

41. PARENT ACCESS CONTRACTOR shall provide for reasonable parental access to LEA students and all facilities including, but

not limited to, the instructional setting, recreational activity areas, meeting rooms and LEA student living quarters.

CONTRACTOR shall comply with any known court orders regarding parental visits and access to LEA

students. If CONTRACTOR has knowledge that permission is required for parental visits, CONTRACTOR shall require the parent(s) to provide written authorization from the designated individual or agency authorized to grant permission for the parental visit.

CONTRACTOR, if operating a program with a residential component, shall cooperate with a parent’s reasonable request for LEA student therapeutic visits in their home or at the NPS/RTC. CONTRACTOR shall ensure that parents obtain prior written authorization for therapeutic visits from the CONTRACTOR and the LEA at least thirty (30) days in advance. CONTRACTOR shall facilitate all parent travel and accommodations and for providing travel information to the parent as appropriate. Payment by LEA for approved travel-related expenses shall be made directly through the LEA. CONTRACTOR providing services in the LEA student’s home as specified in the IEP shall assure that at least one parent of the child, or an adult caregiver with written and signed authorization to make decisions in an emergency, is present. The names of any adult caregiver other than the parent shall be provided to the LEA prior to the start of any home based services, including written and signed authorization in emergency situations. The parent shall inform the LEA of any changes of caregivers and provide written authorization for emergency situation. The adult caregiver cannot also be an employee or volunteer associated with the NPS/NPA service provider. For services provided in LEA student’s home as specified in the IEP, CONTRACTOR must assure that the parent or LEA approved responsible adult is present during the provision of services. All problems and/or concerns reported to parents, both verbal and written, shall also be provided to the LEA.

42. SERVICES AND SUPERVISION AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

If CONTRACTOR provides services on a LEA public school campus, CONTRACTOR shall comply with Penal Code section 627.1 et seq., as well as all other LEA and campus-specific policies and procedures regarding visitors to/on school campuses. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for the purchase and provision of the supplies and assessment tools necessary to implement the provision of CONTRACTOR services on LEA public school campuses. For services provided on a public school campus, sign in/out procedures shall be followed along with all procedures for being on campus consistent with school and LEA policy. It is understood that the public school credentialed classroom teacher is responsible for the educational program and all nonpublic agency




service providers shall work collaboratively with the classroom teacher, who shall remain in charge of the instructional program. It is understood that all employees, subcontractors and volunteers of any certified nonpublic school or agency shall adhere to customary professional standards when providing services. All practices shall be within the scope of professional responsibility as defined in the professional code of conduct for each profession. Reports regarding LEA student progress shall be consistent with the provision of the Master Contract. CONTRACTOR, if providing services outside of the LEA student’s school as specified in the IEP, shall assure that at least one parent of the child or an adult caregiver with written and signed authorization to make decisions in an emergency is present during the provision of services. The names of any adult caregiver other than the parent shall be provided to the LEA prior to the start of any home-based services, including written and signed authorization in emergency situations. The parent shall inform the LEA of any changes of caregivers and provide written authorization for emergency situations. The adult caregiver cannot also be an employee or volunteer associated with the nonpublic school/nonpublic agency service provider. All problems and/or concerns reported to parents, both verbal and written shall also be provided to the LEA.

43. LICENSED CHILDREN’S INSTITUTION CONTRACTORS If CONTRACTOR is a licensed children’s institution (hereinafter referred to as “LCI”), CONTRACTOR

shall adhere to all legal requirements regarding educational placements for LCI students as stated in Education Code sections 56366(a)(2)(C) and 56366.9, Health and Safety Code section 1501.1(b), (AB1858, AB490 (Chapter 862, Statutes of 2003)) and the procedures set forth in the LEA Procedures. An LCI shall not require that a LEA student be placed in its nonpublic school as a condition of being placed in its residential facility.

If CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic, nonsectarian school that is owned, operated by or associated with a

residential treatment center (hereinafter referred to as “NPS/RTC”), CONTRACTOR shall adhere to all legal requirements under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. section 1412(a)(1)(A) and Education Code section 56000, et seq.; amended and reorganized by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. section 1401(29); Education Code section 56031; Cal. Code Regs, Title 5, section 3001 et seq., Cal. Code Regs., Title 2 section 60100 et seq. regarding the provision of counseling services, including residential care for LEA students to receive a FAPE as set forth in the LEA student’s IEPs.

If CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic, nonsectarian school that is owned, operated by, or associated with a LCI,

CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA, on a quarterly basis, a list of all LEA students, including those identified as eligible for special education. For those identified special education students, the list shall include: (1) special education eligibility at the time of enrollment; and (2) the educational placement and services specified in each LEA student’s IEP at the time of enrollment.

Unless placement is made pursuant to an Office of Administrative Hearings order or a lawfully executed

agreement between the LEA and parent, the LEA is not responsible for the costs associated with nonpublic school placement until the date on which an IEP team meeting is convened, the IEP team determines that a nonpublic school placement is appropriate, and the IEP is signed by the LEA student’s parent or another adult with educational decision-making rights.

In addition to meeting the certification requirements of the State of California, a CONTRACTOR that operates a program outside of this State shall be certified or licensed by that State to provide, respectively, special education and related services to students under the Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400 et seq.)




44. STATE MEAL MANDATE When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR and LEA shall satisfy the State Meal

Mandate under California Education Code sections 49530, 49530.5 and 49550. 45. MONITORING CONTRACTOR shall allow representatives from the LEA access to its facilities for the purpose of periodic

monitoring each LEA student’s instructional program and shall be invited to participate in the formal review of each LEA student’s program. LEA shall have access to observe each LEA student at work, observe the instructional setting, interview CONTRACTOR, and review each LEA student’s records and progress. Such access shall include unannounced monitoring visits. When making site visits, LEA shall initially report to CONTRACTOR's site administrative office. CONTRACTOR shall be invited to participate in the review of each LEA student’s progress.

If CONTRACTOR is also an LCI and/or NPS/RTC, the CAHELP JPA shall annually evaluate whether

CONTRACTOR is in compliance with Education Code section 56366.9 and Health and Safety Code section 1501.1(b).

The State Superintendent of Public Instruction (“Superintendent”) shall monitor CONTRACTOR’s facilities,

the educational environment, and the quality of the educational program, including the teaching staff, the credentials authorizing service, the standards-based core curriculum being employed, and the standard focused instructional materials used on a three-year cycle, as follows: (1) CONTRACTOR shall complete a self-review in year one; (2) the Superintendent shall conduct an onsite review in year two; and (3) the Superintendent shall conduct a follow-up visit in year three. CONTRACTOR shall participate in any LEA and CDE compliance review, if applicable, to be conducted as aligned with the CDE Onsite Review and monitoring cycle in accordance with California Education Code section 56366.1(j). This review will address programmatic aspects of the nonpublic school, compliance with relevant State and Federal regulations, and Master Contract compliance. CONTRACTOR shall conduct any follow-up or corrective action procedures related to review findings. CONTRACTOR understands that the LEA reserves the right to institute a program audit with or without cause. The program audit may include, but is not limited to, a review of core compliance areas of health and safety; curriculum/instruction; related services; and contractual, legal, and procedural compliance. When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall collect all applicable data and prepare the applicable portion of a School Accountability Report Card in accordance with California Education Code section 33126.

PERSONNEL 46. CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS

CONTRACTOR shall comply with the requirements of California Education Code section 44237, 35021.1 and 35021.2 including, but not limited to: obtaining clearance from both the California Department of Justice (hereinafter referred to as “CDOJ”) and clearance from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter referred to as "FBI") for all of CONTRACTOR’s employees and volunteers who will have or likely may have any direct contact with LEA students. CONTRACTOR hereby agrees that CONTRACTOR’s




employees and volunteers who will have or likely may have direct contact with LEA students shall not come in contact with LEA students until both CDOJ and FBI clearance are ascertained. CONTRACTOR shall further certify in writing to the LEA that none of its employees, volunteers, unless CONTRACTOR determines that the volunteers will have no direct contact with LEA students, or subcontractors who will have or likely may have any direct contact with LEA students have been convicted of a violent or serious felony as those terms are defined in California Education Code section 44237(h), unless despite the employee’s conviction of a violent or serious felony, he or she has met the criteria to be eligible for employment pursuant to California Education Code section 44237(i) or (j). Clearance certification shall be submitted to the LEA. In addition, CONTRACTOR shall make a request for subsequent arrest service from the CDOJ as required by California Penal Code section 11105.2. The passage of AB389 amends Education Code sections 44237 and 56366.1 as to the verification that the CONTRACTOR has received a successful criminal background check clearance and has enrolled in subsequent arrest notice service, as specified, for each owner, operator, and employee of the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency. Further this bill deletes the exemption for applicants possessing a valid California State teaching credential or who are currently licensed by another State agency that requires a criminal record summary, from submitting two sets of fingerprints for the purpose of obtaining a criminal record summary from the CDOJ and FBI. Notwithstanding the restrictions on sharing and destroying criminal background check information, CONTRACTOR, upon demand, shall make available to the LEA evidence of a successful criminal background check clearance and enrollment in subsequent arrest notice service, as provided, for each owner, operator, and employee of the nonpublic, nonsectarian school or agency. CONTRACTOR is required to retain the evidence on-site, as specified, for all staff, including those licensed or credentialed by another State agency. Background clearances and proof of subsequent arrest notification services as required by California Penal Code section 11105.2 for all staff shall be provided upon request.

47. STAFF QUALIFICATIONS CONTRACTOR shall ensure that all individuals employed, contracted, and/or otherwise hired by

CONTRACTOR to provide classroom and/or individualized instruction or provide related services hold a license, certificate, permit, or other document equivalent to that which staff in a public school are required to hold to render the service consistent with Education Code section 56366.1(n)(1) and are qualified pursuant to Title 34 of the Code of Federal Regulations sections 200.56 and 200.58, and Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations sections 3001(y), 3064 and 3065. Such qualified staff may only provide related services within the scope of their professional license, certification or credential and ethical standards set by each profession and not assume responsibility or authority for another related services provider or special education teacher’s scope of practice.

CONTRACTOR shall ensure that each special education teacher meets the Highly Qualified Teacher requirements and holds a full and valid CTC credential authorizing instruction to LEA students with the disabling conditions placed in the teacher’s classroom through documentation provided to the CDE (Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 3064 (a)). Documentation (e.g., a letter) must exist in the employee's personnel file if the teacher does not have the appropriate certification or authorization to teach a LEA student with specific disability indicating this is not a misassignment but rather an IEP team determination of FAPE. The teachers shall also be authorized to teach English language learners as needed. When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, an appropriately qualified person shall serve as curricular and instructional leader, and be able to provide leadership, oversight and professional development. CONTRACTOR shall comply with personnel standards and qualifications regarding instructional aides and teacher assistants respectively pursuant to Federal requirements and California Education Code sections




45340 et seq. and 45350 et seq. Specifically, all paraprofessionals, including, but not limited to instructional aides and teacher assistants, employed, contracted, and/or otherwise hired or subcontracted by CONTRACTOR to provide classroom and/or individualized instruction or related services, shall possess a high school diploma (or its recognized equivalent); and at least one of the following qualifications: (a) completed at least 2 years of study at an institution of higher education; or (b) obtained an associate’s (or higher) degree; or (3) met a rigorous standard of quality and can demonstrate through a formal State or local assessment (i) knowledge of, and the ability to assist in instructing, reading, writing, and mathematics; or (ii) knowledge of, and the ability to assist in instructing, reading readiness, writing readiness, and mathematics readiness, as appropriate. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all laws and regulations governing the licensed professions, including but not limited to, the provisions with respect to supervision. In addition to meeting the certification requirements of the State of California, a CONTRACTOR that operates a program outside of this State and serving a student by this LEA shall be certified or licensed by that State to provide special education and related services to students under the Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1400 et seq.).

48. VERIFICATION OF LICENSES, CREDENTIALS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS

CONTRACTOR shall submit to the LEA and CAHELP JPA a staff list, and copies of all current and required licenses, certifications, credentials, permits and/or other documents which entitle the holder to provide special education and/or related services by CONTRACTOR and all individuals employed, contracted, and/or otherwise hired or sub-contracted by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall ensure that all licenses, certifications, credentials, permits or other documents are on file at the office of the County Superintendent of Schools. CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA in writing within thirty (30) days when personnel changes occur which may affect the provision of special education and/or related services to LEA students as specified in the LEA procedures. CONTRACTOR shall provide the LEA with the verified dates of fingerprint clearance, Department of Justice clearance and Tuberculosis Test clearance for all employees, approved subcontractors and/or volunteers prior to such individuals starting to work with any LEA student. CONTRACTOR shall monitor the status of licenses, certifications, credentials, permits and/or other documents for CONTRACTOR and all individuals employed, contracted, and/or otherwise hired by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR shall notify LEA and CDE in writing within thirty (30) calendar days when personnel changes occur which may affect the provision of special education and/or related services to LEA students. CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA within thirty (30) calendar days if any such licenses, certifications or waivers are expired, suspended, revoked, rescinded, challenged pursuant to an administrative or legal complaint or lawsuit, or otherwise nullified during the effective period of this Master Contract. The LEA shall not be obligated to pay for any services provided by a person whose such licenses, certifications or waivers are expired, suspended, revoked, rescinded, or otherwise nullified during the period which such person is providing services under this Master Contract. Failure to notify the LEA and CDE of any changes in credentialing/licensed staff may result in suspension or revocation of CDE certification and/or suspension or termination of this Master Contract by the LEA.

49. STAFF ABSENCE When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school and CONTRACTOR’s classroom teacher is absent,

CONTRACTOR shall provide an appropriately credentialed substitute teacher in the absent teacher’s classroom in accordance with California Education Code section 56061. CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA documentation of substitute coverage on the LEA substitute teacher log. Substitute teachers shall remain with their assigned class during all instructional time. The LEA shall not be responsible for any payment for instruction and/or services when an appropriately credentialed substitute teacher is not provided.




When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency and/or related services provider, and CONTRACTOR’s service provider is absent, CONTRACTOR shall provide a qualified (as defined in section seven (7) of this agreement and as determined by the LEA) substitute, unless the LEA provides appropriate coverage in lieu of CONTRACTOR’s service providers. It is understood that the parent of a LEA student shall not be deemed to be a qualified substitute for his/her child. The LEA will not pay for services unless a qualified substitute is provided and/or CONTRACTOR provides documentation evidencing the provision of “make-up” services by a qualified service provider within thirty (30) calendar days from the date on which the services should have been provided. CONTRACTOR shall not “bank” or “carry over” make up service hours under any circumstances, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by CONTRACTOR and an authorized LEA representative.

50. STAFF PROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR WHEN PROVIDING SERVICES AT SCHOOL OR SCHOOL RELATED EVENTS OR AT SCHOOL FACLITY AND/OR IN THE HOME It is understood that all employees, subcontractors, and volunteers of any certified nonpublic school or nonpublic agency shall adhere to the customary professional and ethical standards when providing services. All practices shall only be within the scope of professional responsibility as defined in the professional code of conduct for each profession as well as any LEA professional standards as specified in Board policies and/or regulations when made available to the CONTRACTOR. It is neither required nor desirable that an employee of the LEA or CONTRACTOR, related service provider, student, or parent be subjected to abusive language or behavior. All parties under this Master Contract shall promote mutual respect, civility, and orderly conduct when carrying out the provisions of this Agreement. Reports regarding LEA student progress shall be consistent with the provision of this Master Contract.

For services provided on a public school campus, sign in/out procedures shall be followed by nonpublic agency providers working in a public school classroom along with all other procedures for being on campus consistent with school and LEA policy. It is understood that the public school credentialed classroom teacher is responsible for the instructional program, and all nonpublic agency service providers shall work collaboratively with the classroom teacher, who shall remain in charge of the instructional program. For services provided in a student’s home as specified in the IEP, CONTRACTOR must assure that the parent or guardian, authorized adult caregiver, or an LEA-approved responsible adult is present during the provision of services. All problems and/or concerns reported to parents, both verbal and written shall also be provided to the LEA.

HEALTH AND SAFETY MANDATES 51. HEALTH AND SAFETY

CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, local, and LEA laws, regulations, ordinances, policies, and procedures regarding student and employee health and safety. CONTRACTOR shall comply with the requirements of California Education Code sections 35021 et seq., 49406, and Health and Safety Code section 3454(a) regarding the examination of CONTRACTOR’s employees and volunteers for tuberculosis. CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA documentation for each individual volunteering, employed, contracted, and/or otherwise hired by CONTRACTOR of such compliance before an individual comes in contact with an LEA student.

CONTRACTOR shall comply with OSHA Blood Borne Pathogens Standards, Title 29 Code of Federal

Regulations section 1910.1030, when providing medical treatment or assistance to a student.




CONTRACTOR further agrees to provide annual training regarding universal health care precautions and to post required notices in areas designated in the California Health and Safety Code.

52. FACILITIES AND FACILITIES MODIFICATIONS CONTRACTOR shall provide special education and/or related services to LEA students in facilities that

comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances related, but not limited to: disability access; fire, health, sanitation, and building standards and safety; fire warning systems; zoning permits; and occupancy capacity. When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, CONTRACTOR shall conduct fire drills as required by Title 5 California Code of Regulations section 550. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for any structural changes and/or modifications to CONTRACTOR’s facilities as required to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local laws, regulations, and ordinances. Failure to notify the LEA and CDE of any changes in, major modification or relocation of facilities may result in the suspension or revocation of CDE certification and/or suspension or termination of this Master Contract by the LEA.

CONTRACTOR shall have a disaster plan with written emergency procedures and operations in the event of a catastrophic occurrence such as, but not limited to, an earthquake, bomb threat, medical emergencies and/or power outage. CONTRACTOR shall maintain and keep available for inspection by the LEA/CAHELP JPA a log containing the date, time, and length of all practice disaster drills completed during the current school year, as well as all practice drills completed during the previous three (3) years. CONTRACTOR shall report within seven (7) days to the LEA/CAHELP JPA any violations of items found out of compliance by the fire marshal during inspection of the premises and accompanying buildings. The CONTRACTOR is required to have an operational fire warning system that complies with all required State and Federal laws. Additionally, the CONTRACTOR must also have an occupancy capacity sign clearly posted in all rooms as required in California Health and Safety Code and/or by the fire marshal.

53. ADMINISTRATION OF MEDICATION

Unless otherwise set forth in the LEA student’s IEP, CONTRACTOR shall comply with the requirements of California Education Code section 49423 when CONTRACTOR serves a LEA student that is required to take prescription and/or over-the-counter medication during the school day. CONTRACTOR may designate personnel to assist the LEA student with the administration of such medication after the LEA student’s parent(s) provides to CONTRACTOR: (a) a written statement from a physician detailing the type, administration method, amount, and time schedules by which such medication shall be taken; and (b) a written statement from the LEA student’s parent(s) granting CONTRACTOR permission to administer medication(s) as specified in the physician’s statement. CONTRACTOR shall maintain, and provide to the LEA upon request, copies of such written statements. CONTRACTOR shall maintain a written log for each LEA student to whom medication is administered. Such written log shall specify the LEA student’s name; the type of medication; the date, time, and amount of each administration; and the name of CONTRACTOR’s employee who administered the medication. CONTRACTOR maintains full responsibility for assuring appropriate staff training in the administration of such medication consistent with LEA student’s physician’s written orders. Any change in medication type, administration method, amount or schedule must be authorized by both a licensed physician and parent.

54. INCIDENT/ACCIDENT REPORTING CONTRACTOR shall submit within twenty-four (24) hours by fax, electronically, and/or U.S. mail, any

accident or incident report to the LEA when it becomes aware of circumstances including, but not limited to:




allegations of molestation, child abuse, missing children under CONTRACTOR's supervision, the need for mental health service; injuries requiring medical attention; injuries resulting from physical restraint, LEA student has injured another individual, or has been involved in an activity requiring notification of law enforcement or emergency personnel. CONTRACTOR shall properly submit required accident or incident reports pursuant to the procedures specified in LEA procedures.

55. CHILD ABUSE REPORTING

CONTRACTOR hereby agrees to annually train all staff members, including volunteers, so that they are familiar with and agree to adhere to its own child and dependent adult abuse reporting obligations and procedures as specified in California Penal Code section 11164 et seq. To protect the privacy rights of all parties involved (i.e., reporter, child and alleged abuser), reports will remain confidential as required by law and professional ethical mandates. A written statement acknowledging the legal requirements of such reporting and verification of staff adherence to such reporting shall be submitted to the LEA.

56. SEXUAL HARASSMENT

CONTRACTOR shall have a Sexual and Gender Identity Harassment Policy that clearly describes the kinds of conduct that constitutes sexual harassment and that is prohibited by the CONTRACTOR’s policy, as well as Federal and State law. The policy should include procedures to make complaints without fear of retaliation, and for prompt and objective investigations of all sexual harassment complaints. CONTRACTOR further agrees to provide annual training to all employees regarding the laws concerning sexual harassment and related procedures.

57. REPORTING OF MISSING CHILDREN CONTRACTOR assures the LEA that all staff members, including volunteers are familiar with and agree to

adhere to requirements for reporting missing children as specified in California Education Code section 49370. A written statement acknowledging the legal requirements of such reporting and verification of staff adherence to such reporting shall be properly submitted to the LEA. The written statement shall be submitted as specified by the LEA.

FINANCIAL

58. ENROLLMENT, CONTRACTING, SERVICE TRACKING, ATTENDANCE REPORTING, AND

BILLING PROCEDURES

CONTRACTOR shall assure that the nonpublic school or nonpublic agency has the necessary financial resources to provide an appropriate education for the children enrolled and will distribute those resources in such a manner to implement the IEP and ISA for each and every child. CONTRACTOR shall comply with all LEA procedures concerning enrollment, contracting, attendance reporting, service tracking and billing, including requirements of electronic billing, as specified by the LEA procedures. CONTRACTOR shall be paid for the provision of special education and/or related services specified in the LEA student’s IEP and ISA which are provided on billable days of attendance. All payments by LEA shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Master Contract and in compliance with the LEA procedures, and will be governed by all applicable Federal and State laws.

CONTRACTOR shall maintain separate registers for the basic education program, each related service, and services provided by instructional assistants, behavioral intervention aides and bus aides. Original attendance




forms (i.e., roll books for the basic education program service tracking documents and notes for instructional assistants, behavioral intervention aides, bus aides, and each related service) shall be completed by the actual service provider whose signature shall appear on such forms and shall be available for review, inspection, or audit by the LEA during the effective period of this Master Contract and for a period of five (5) years thereafter. CONTRACTOR shall verify the accuracy of minutes of reported attendance that is the basis of services being billed for payment. CONTRACTOR shall submit invoices and related documents to the LEA for payment, for each calendar month when education or related services were provided. Invoices and related documents shall be properly submitted electronically and in addition, on a LEA form with signatures in the manner prescribed by LEA in the LEA procedures. At a minimum, each invoice must contain the following information: month of service; specific days and times of services coordinated by the LEA approved calendar unless otherwise specified in the ISA or agreed to by the LEA; name of staff who provided the service; approved cost of each invoice; total for each service and total for the monthly invoice; date invoice was mailed; signature of the nonpublic school/nonpublic agency administrator authorizing that the information is accurate and consistent with the ISA, CDE certificates and staff notification; verification that attendance report is attached as appropriate; indication of any made-up session consistent with this Master Contract; verification that progress reports have been provided consistent with the ISA (monthly or quarterly unless specified otherwise on the ISA); and the name or initials of each LEA student for when the service was provided. In the event services were not provided, rationale for why the services were not provided shall be included. Such an invoice is subject to all conditions of this Master Contract. At the discretion of the LEA, an electronic invoice may be required provided such notice has been made in writing and training provided to the CONTRACTOR at no additional charge for such training. Invoices shall be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the end of the attendance accounting period in which the services were rendered. LEA shall make payment to CONTRACTOR based on the number of billable days of attendance and hours of service at rates specified in this Master Contract within forty-five (45) days of LEA’s receipt of properly submitted hard copy of invoices prepared and submitted as specified in California Education Code section 56366.5 and the LEA. CONTRACTOR shall correct deficiencies and submit rebilling invoices no later than thirty (30) calendar days after the invoice is returned by LEA. LEA shall pay properly submitted re-billing invoices no later than forty-five (45) days after the date a completed corrected re-billing invoice is received by the LEA. In no case shall initial payment claim submission for any Master Contract fiscal year (July through June) extend beyond December 31st after the close of the fiscal year. In no case shall any rebilling for the Master Contract fiscal year (July through June) extend beyond six months after the close of the fiscal year unless approved by the LEA to resolve billing issues including rebilling issues directly related to a delay in obtaining information from the Commission on Teacher Credentialing regarding teacher qualification, but no later than twelve (12) months from the close of the fiscal year. If the billing or rebilling error is the responsibility of the LEA, then no limit is set provided that the LEA and CONTRACTOR have communicated such concerns in writing during the 12-month period following the close of the fiscal year. CAHELP JPA will not pay mileage for NPA employee unless authorized through an ISA.

59. RIGHT TO WITHHOLD PAYMENT

The LEA may withhold payment to CONTRACTOR when: (a) CONTRACTOR has failed to perform, in whole or in part, under the terms of this Master Contract; (b) CONTRACTOR has billed for services rendered on days other than billable days of attendance or for days when LEA student was not in attendance and/or did not receive services; (c) CONTRACTOR was overpaid by LEA as determined by inspection,




review, and/or audit of its program, work, and/or records; (d) CONTRACTOR has failed to provide supporting documentation with an invoice, as required by California Education Code section 56366(c)(2); (e) education and/or related services are provided to LEA students by personnel who are not appropriately credentialed, licensed, or otherwise qualified; (f) LEA has not received, prior to school closure or contract termination, all documents concerning one or more LEA students enrolled in CONTRACTOR’s educational program; (g) CONTRACTOR fails to confirm a LEA student’s change of residence to another district or confirms the change or residence to another district, but fails to notify LEA with five (5) days of such confirmation; or (h) CONTRACTOR receives payment from Medi-Cal or from any other agency or funding source for a service provided to a LEA student. It is understood that no payments shall be made for any invoices that are not received by six (6) months following the close of the prior fiscal year, for services provided in that year. Final payment to CONTRACTOR in connection with the cessation of operations and/or termination of a Master Contract will be subject to the same documentation standards described for all payment claims for regular ongoing operations. In addition, final payment may be withheld by the LEA until completion of a review or audit, if deemed necessary by the LEA. Such review or audit shall be completed within ninety (90) days. The final payment may be adjusted to offset any previous payments to the CONTRACTOR determined to have been paid in error or in anticipation of correction of documentation deficiencies by the CONTRACTOR that remain uncorrected.

The amount which may be withheld by the LEA with respect to each of the subparagraphs of the preceding paragraph are as follows: (a): the value of the service CONTRACTOR failed to perform; (b) the amount of overpayment; (c) the entire amount of the invoice for which satisfactory documentation has not been provided by CONTRACTOR; (d) the amount invoiced for services provided by the individual not appropriately credentialed, licensed, or otherwise qualified; (e) the proportionate amount of the invoice related to the applicable LEA student for the time period from the date of the violation occurred and until the violation is cured; or (f) if the amount paid to CONTRACTOR by Medi-Cal or another agency or funding source for the service provided to the LEA student. If the LEA determines that cause exists to withhold payment to CONTRACTOR, LEA shall, within ten (10) business days of this determination, provide to CONTRACTOR written notice that LEA is withholding payment. Such notice shall specify the basis or bases for the LEA’s withholding payment and the amount to be withheld. Within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of such notice, CONTRACTOR shall take all necessary and appropriate action to correct the deficiencies that form the basis for the LEA’s withholding payment or submit a written request for extension of time to correct the deficiencies. Upon receipt of CONTRACTOR’s written request showing good cause, the LEA shall extend CONTRACTOR’s time to correct deficiencies (usually an additional thirty (30) days), otherwise payment will be denied. If after subsequent request for payment has been denied and CONTRACTOR believes that payment should not be withheld, CONTRACTOR shall send written notice to the LEA specifying the reason it believes payment should not be withheld. The LEA shall respond to CONTRACTOR’s notice within thirty (30) business days by indicating that a warrant for the amount of payment will be made or stating the reason the LEA believes payment should not be made. If the LEA fails to respond within thirty (30) business days or a dispute regarding the withholding of payment continues after the LEA’s response to CONTRACTOR’s notice, CONTRACTOR may invoke the following escalation policy.

After forty-five (45) business days: The CONTRACTOR may notify the Authorized LEA’s Representative of the dispute in writing. The LEA Authorized Representative shall respond to the CONTRACTOR in writing within fifteen (15) business days.




After sixty (60) business days: Disagreements between the LEA and CONTRACTOR concerning the Master Contract may be appealed to the County Superintendent of Schools or the State Superintendent of Public Instruction pursuant to the provisions of California Education Code section 56366(c)(2).

60. PAYMENT FROM OUTSIDE AGENCIES CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA when Medi-Cal or any other agency is billed for the costs associated

with the provision of special education and/or related services to LEA students. Upon request, CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA any and all documentation regarding reports, billing, and/or payment by Medi-Cal or any other agency for the costs associated with the provision of special education and/or related services to LEA students.

61. PAYMENT FOR ABSENCES

• Nonpublic School Staff Absence Whenever a classroom teacher employed by CONTRACTOR is absent, CONTRACTOR shall provide

an appropriately credentialed substitute teacher in the absent teacher’s classroom in accordance with California Education Code section 56061. CONTRACTOR shall provide to the LEA documentation of substitute coverage pursuant to the LEA procedures. Substitute teachers shall remain with their assigned class during all instructional time. The LEA will not pay for instruction and/or services unless said instruction or service is provided by an appropriately credentialed substitute teacher.

Whenever a related service provider is absent, CONTRACTOR shall provide a qualified (as defined in

section seven (7) of this agreement and as determined by LEA) substitute. The LEA will not pay for services unless a qualified substitute is provided and/or CONTRACTOR provides documentation evidencing the provision of “make-up” services by a qualified service provider within thirty (30) calendar days from the date on which the services should have been provided unless otherwise agreed in LEA student’s IEP or ISA.

• Nonpublic School Student Absence

If CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school, no later than the tenth (10th) cumulative day of the LEA

student’s unexcused absence, CONTRACTOR shall notify the LEA of such absence as specified in the LEA procedures.

Criteria for a billable day for payment purposes is one day of attendance as defined in California

Education Code sections 46010, 46010.3 and 46307. The LEA shall not pay for services provided on days that a LEA student’s attendance does not qualify for Average Daily Attendance (ADA) reimbursement under State law. Per Diem rates for LEA students whose IEPs authorize less than a full instructional day may be adjusted on a pro rata basis in accordance with the actual proportion of the school day the LEA student was served. The LEA shall not be responsible for payment of related services for days on which a LEA student’s attendance does not qualify for Average Daily Attendance (ADA) reimbursement under State law, nor shall LEA student be eligible for make-up services.

• Nonpublic Agency Staff Absence

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency and CONTRACTOR’s service provider is absent, CONTRACTOR shall provide a qualified (as defined in section seven (7) of this Agreement and as determined by the LEA) substitute, unless the LEA provides appropriate coverage in lieu of CONTRACTOR’s service providers. The LEA shall not pay for services unless a qualified substitute is




provided and/or CONTRACTOR provides documentation evidencing the provision of “make-up” services by a qualified service provider within thirty (30) calendar days from the date on which the services should have been provided. CONTRACTOR shall not “bank” or “carry over” make up service hours under any circumstances, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by CONTRACTOR and the LEA. In the event services were not provided, reasons for why the services were not provided shall be included.

• Nonpublic Agency Student Absence

If CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic agency, it shall notify LEA of the absence of a LEA student no later than the fifth consecutive service day of the LEA student’s absence, as specified in the LEA procedures. The LEA shall not be responsible for the payment of services when LEA student is absent.

62. INSPECTION AND AUDIT

The CONTRACTOR shall maintain and the LEA shall have the right to examine and audit all of the books, records, documents, accounting procedures and practices and other evidence that reflect all costs claimed to have been incurred or fees claimed to have been earned under this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall provide the LEA access to all records including, but not limited to: student records as defined by California Education Code section 49061(b); registers and roll books of teachers; daily service logs and notes or other documents used to record the provision of related services; Medi-Cal/daily service logs and notes used to record provision of services provided by instructional assistants, behavior intervention aides, bus aides, and supervisors; absence verification records (parent/doctor notes, telephone logs, and related documents); bus rosters; staff lists specifying credentials held, business licenses held, documents evidencing other qualifications, dates of hire, and dates of termination; staff time sheets; non-paid staff and volunteer sign-in sheets; transportation and other related service subcontracts; school calendars; bell/class schedules when applicable; liability and worker’s compensation insurance policies; State nonpublic school and/or agency certifications; by-laws; lists of current board of directors/trustees, if incorporated; other documents evidencing financial expenditures; Federal/State payroll quarterly reports Form 941/DE3DP; and bank statements and canceled checks or facsimile thereof. Such access shall include unannounced inspections by the LEA. CONTRACTOR shall make available to the LEA all budgetary information including operating budgets submitted by CONTRACTOR to the LEA for the relevant contract period being audited. CONTRACTOR shall make all records available at the office of the LEA or CONTRACTOR’s offices (to be specified by the LEA) at all reasonable times and without charge. All records shall be provided to the LEA within five (5) working days of a written request from the LEA. CONTRACTOR shall, at no cost to the LEA, provide assistance for such examination or audit. The LEA’s rights under this section shall also include access to CONTRACTOR’s offices for purposes of interviewing CONTRACTOR’s employees. If any document or evidence is stored in an electronic form, a hard copy shall be made available to the LEA, unless the LEA agrees to the use of the electronic format. CONTRACTOR shall obtain from its subcontractors and suppliers written agreements to the requirements of this section and shall provide a copy of such agreements to the LEA upon request by the LEA.

If an inspection, review, or audit by the LEA, a State agency, a Federal agency, and/or an independent agency/firm determines that CONTRACTOR owes the LEA monies as a result of CONTRACTOR’s over billing or failure to perform, in whole or in part, any of its obligations under this Master Contract, the LEA shall provide to CONTRACTOR written notice demanding payment from CONTRACTOR and specifying the basis or bases for such demand. Unless CONTRACTOR and the LEA otherwise agree in writing, CONTRACTOR shall pay to the LEA the full amount owed as result of CONTRACTOR’s over billing




and/or failure to perform, in whole or in part, any of its obligations under this Master Contract, as determined by an inspection, review, or audit by the LEA, a State agency, a Federal agency, and/or an independent agency/firm. CONTRACTOR shall make such payment to the LEA within thirty (30) days of receipt of the LEA’s written notice demanding payment.

63. RATE SCHEDULE

The attached rate schedule (Exhibit A) limits the number of LEA students that may be enrolled and the

maximum dollar amount of the contract. It may also limit the maximum number of students that can be provided specific services. Per Diem rates for LEA students whose IEPs authorize less than a full instructional day may be adjusted proportionally. In such cases only, the adjustments in basic education rate shall be based on the percentage of a 314-minute instructional day.

Special education and/or related services offered by CONTRACTOR shall be provided by qualified

personnel as per State and Federal law, and the codes and charges for such educational and/or related services during the term of this contract, shall be as stated in Exhibit A.

When CONTRACTOR is a nonpublic school associated with a Residential Treatment Center (“NPS/RTC”),

Educationally Related Mental Health Services (ERMHS) are provided in an integrated, intensive, educationally related therapeutic residential setting; which includes social emotional/behavioral support through individual counseling, group counseling, family consultation and support, as appropriate. It is a collaborative model which includes educational professionals and related service providers, where all supports and services are integrated in the NPS/RTC program. Educationally Related Mental Health Services (ERMHS) costs are all inclusive and combined with the daily rate as ERMHS+RB (ERMHS + Room and Board). ERMHS plus Room and Board payments are based on positive attendance (payable for up to a maximum of 365 days) only, with up to a maximum of ten (10) days payment per student, per contract year, when a bed is unoccupied, for home visits of a therapeutic nature.

64. DEBARMENT CERTIFICATION

By signing this agreement, CONTRACTOR certifies that: (a) CONTRACTOR and any of its shareholders, partners, or executive officers are not presently

debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, or declared ineligible for the award of contracts by any Federal agency, and

(b) Has/have not, within a three-year period preceding this contract, been convicted of or had a civil

judgment rendered against them for: commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a Federal, State or local government contract or subcontract; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes relating to the submission of offers; or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, tax evasion, or receiving stolen property; and are not presently indicted for, or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government entity with, commission of any of these offenses.




The parties hereto have executed this Master Contract by and through their duly authorized agents or representatives. This Master Contract is effective on the 1st day of July 2015 and terminates at 5:00 P.M. on June 30, 2016, unless sooner terminated as provide herein. CONTRACTOR CAHELP JPA / (LEA)

California Health and Education Linked Professions Nonpublic School/Agency

By: By: Signature Date Signature Date

Jenae Holtz, Chief Executive Officer, CAHELP JPA Name and Title of Authorized Representative Name and Title of Authorized Representative




Notices to CONTRACTOR shall be addressed to: Notices to CAHELP JPA / LEA shall be addressed to:

Name

Name and Title

Jenae Holtz, Chief Executive Officer, CAHELP JPA Nonpublic School/Agency/Related Services Provider

CAHELP JPA / LEA

California Health and Education Linked Professions Address

Address

17800 Highway 18 City

State

Zip

City Apple Valley

State CA

Zip 92307

Phone

Fax

Phone (760) 955-3555

Fax (760) 242-5363

Email

Email

[email protected]

Additional CAHELP JPA / LEA Notification:

Name and Title

Denise Edge, Program Manager Address

17800 Highway 18 City

Apple Valley State CA

Zip 92307

Phone (760) 955-3568

Fax (760) 242-5363

Email

[email protected]






EXHIBIT A: RATES

CONTRACTOR: CONTRACT: NO: YEAR: 2015-2016 (Nonpublic School or Agency)

Per CDE Certification, total enrollment may not exceed: (If blank, the number shall be determined by CDE Certification) Rate Schedule: This rate schedule limits the number of LEA students that may be enrolled and the maximum dollar amount of the contract. It may also limit the maximum number of students that can be provided specific services. Special education and/or related services offered by CONTRACTOR, and the charges for such educational and/or related services during the term of this contract shall be as follows: Payment under this contract may not exceed: Total LEA enrollment may not exceed: RATE PERIOD A. BASIC EDUCATION PROGRAM/SPECIAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTION Basic Education Program/Dual Enrollment

Per diem rates for LEA students whose IEPs authorize less than a full instructional day shall be adjusted proportionally. B. RELATED SERVICES a. Transportation - Round Trip b. Transportation - One Way c. Transportation - Dual Enrollment d. Public Transportation e. Parent Travel* (Approved family therapy visit) Cost should reflect “ACTUAL” f. Transportation - Secure/Escort Services for RTC purposes Cost should reflect “ACTUAL” g. Transportation - Therapeutic Home Visits for RTC purposes Cost should reflect “ACTUAL” a. Educational Counseling - Individual b. Educational Counseling - Group of c. Counseling - Parent a. Adapted Physical Education - Individual b. Adapted Physical Education - Group of c. Adapted Physical Education - Group of a. Language and Speech Therapy - Individual b. Language and Speech Therapy - Group of 2 c. Language and Speech Therapy - Group of 3 d. Language and Speech Therapy - Per Diem e. Language and Speech Therapy - Consultation Rate a. Additional Instructional Assistant - Individual (must be authorized on IEP) b. Additional Instructional Assistant - Group of 2 c. Additional Instructional Assistant - Group of 3 a. Intensive Special Education Instruction ** a. Occupational Therapy - Individual b. Occupational Therapy - Group of 2 c. Occupational Therapy - Group of 3 d. Occupational Therapy - Group of 4-7

Chapter 5:Supports and Services

SECTION A LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT - A CONTINUUM OF SERVICES AND PLACEMENT OPTIONS

SECTION B RELATED SERVICES

SECTION C SERVICE ANIMALS

SECTION D ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

APPENDIX A GUIDELINE STATEMENT - LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT

APPENDIX B DETERMINING THE NEED FOR SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE INSTRUCTIONAL ASSISTANCE (SCIA)

APPENDIX C TRANSPORTATION GUIDELINES

APPENDIX D CARS+ GUIDANCE FOR RSP TEACHERS

APPENDIX E MEMORANDUM BY FAGEN FRIEDMAN & FULFROST: TRAINING & CONTROL OF SERVICE ANIMALS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY

APPENDIX F WAIVER & RELEASE OF LIABILITY: PERMISSION TO BRING GUIDE DOGS, SIGNAL DOGS, AND SERVICE DOGS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY OR TO SCHOOL-SPONSORED PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES

APPENDIX G EXTENDED SCHOOL YEAR (ESY) GUIDELINES

APPENDIX H SELPA REFERRAL PROCEDURES

Legal References

CA Education Code Sections39839, 56360,56361, 56363(a),56363(b)

5 CA Code ofRegulations3065

CA Civil Code54, 54.2

Last Updated:08/28/15

Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area

Chapter 16:State and District Assessment Programs

SECTION A PROFILES OF STATE ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS

SECTION B GUIDANCE FOR MAKING ACCOMMODATION DECISIONS

SECTION C DESIRED RESULTS DEVELOPMENTAL PROFILE (DRDP)

SECTION D GUIDE TO THE ACCOMMODATION MATRIX: CALIFORNIA HIGH SCHOOL EXIT EXAM (CAHSEE), CALIFORNIA ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT TESTING (CELDT), AND PHYSICAL FITNESS TESTING (PFT)

SECTION E GUIDE TO THE ACCOMMODATION MATRIX: CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE AND PROGRESS (CAASPP)

SECTION F AN OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX A MEMO FROM DR. ALICE PARKER: DIFFERENTIAL PROFICIENCY STANDARDS AND THE HIGH SCHOOL EXIT EXAM

APPENDIX B CAHSEE EXEMPTION FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)

APPENDIX C SELPA FORM D/M 68L - CAASPP TESTING ACCOMMODATIONS

APPENDIX D SELPA FORM D/M 68L - CAHSEE, CELDT, AND PFT TESTING ACCOMMODATIONS

Legal References

CA Education CodeSections56345(a), 56375, 56376, 60641(b), 60850(a), 60851

Last Updated:8/20154


Chapter 16 - State and District Assessment, Programs, Desert/Mountain SELPA Page 2As of 8/15/2014/2015

IntroductionAll California students are required to participate in a variety of State and district-wide assessments that are designed to assess progress of the students towards established performance goals. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 2004 and California Education Code require the inclusion of students with exceptional needs in State and district-wide assessment programs with appropriate accommodations being made for the students where necessary. The California approved achievement tests are administered each spring to all students in grades 3-8, and 11. Local educational agencies (LEAs) utilize the information that is gathered to make decisions regarding how to design and implement instruction for their students.

Section A - Profiles of State Assessment ProgramsTesting Accommodations

E.C. 56345(a). The individualized education program is a written statement for each individual with exceptional needs that is developed, reviewed, and revised in accordance with [state and federal law] and includes the following: (6)(A) A statement of individual appropriate accommodations that are necessary to measure the academic achievement and functional performance of the pupil on state and district wide assessments; (B) If the individualized education program team determines that the pupil shall take an alternate assessment instead of a particular state or district wide assessment of pupil achievement, a statement of the following: (i) The reason why the pupil cannot participate in the regular assessment; (ii) The reason why the particular alternate assessment selected is appropriate for the pupil.

Academically Rigorous Content Standards

E.C. 60850(a). The Superintendent of Public Instruction, with the approval of the State board of Education, shall develop a high school exit examination in English language arts and mathematics in accordance with the statewide academically rigorous content standards adopted by the State Board of Education pursuant to Section 60605. To facilitate the development of the examination, the superintendent shall review any existing high school subject matter examinations that are linked to, or can be aligned with, the statewide academically rigorous content standards for English language arts and mathematics adopted by the State Board of Education. By October 1, 2000, the State Board of Education shall adopt a high school exit examination that is aligned with statewide academically rigorous content standards.

The goal of instituting the high school exit exam is to ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skill and knowledge needed to be successful in college or the work placeThe goal of the high school exit exam is to assess the level of competency that students have acquired throughout their participation in high school in preparation for college, the work place, and their communities.

Students with special needs will also beare required to participate in the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) if the course of study documented in the Individualized Education Program (IEP) leads to a high school diploma. As with all students, the a student with special needs will be required to attempt sections of the exam prior to graduation. The current exemption for the CAHSEE is through June 2015. In


accordance with IDEA 2004, this exam may be given administered using with accommodations where necessary. These accommodations shall be documented in the student’s IEP. The California Department of Education (CDE) has specified approved accommodations as noted in Section D of this documentchapter. Students who have not demonstrated progress toward passing the high school exit exam, have low grades, or have received low scores on the State testing will be provided supplemental instruction in the content contained in the Common Core language arts and mathematics standards. LEAs will also be responsible for providing summer school programs and other programs that extend the traditional school day or year for students who continue to need additional instruction to successfully pass the exit exam.

For students with special needs who do not pass one or both sections of the exam, California Education Code section 60852.3 provides an exemption beginning in the 2009-2010 school year from meeting the CAHSEE requirement as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation for eligible students with disabilities (any type of disability, for any duration) who have an IEP or Section 504 plan, and meet all requirements for the exemption. The IEP or Section 504 plan must state that the student is scheduled to receive a high school diploma, and has satisfied or will satisfy all other State and local requirements for high school graduation. In order for students to be eligible for the exemption they are required to take the CAHSEE in grade 10 to fulfill the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Students should be encouraged to continue to take the CAHSEE, and to receive appropriate remedial instruction. LEAs are strongly encouraged to continue to offer remedial instruction and access to the CAHSEE. The student’s right to an exemption is State law; therefore, LEAs cannot require students on an IEP or Section 504 plan to take the CAHSEE beyond grade 10 unless the student did not take and pass the CAHSEE in grade 10.

The IDEA 2004 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require that the IEP or Section 504 plan address how the student will participate in statewide assessments. If a student with special needs has meet or will meet the exemption requirements and will no longer participate in the CAHSEE, it should be noted in the IEP or Section 504 plan and should state that the student will meet the CAHSEE requirement through the exemption. California Education Code section 60852.3(b) states that this exemption will last until the State Board of Education (SBE) makes either a determination that alternative means to the CAHSEE for students with disabilities are not feasible or such alternative means have been implemented. The new law expressly prohibits any LEA from adopting an IEP or Section 504 plan for the sole purpose of exemption a student from the CAHSEE requirement.

Students with an IEP or Section 504 Plan can meet the CAHSEE requirement through one of the following:

Pass the CAHSEE: The student scores 350 or higher on the mathematics and/or ELA portion ofthe CAHSEE with the use of accommodations but without the use of modifications;Request a local waiver: The student scores 350 or higher on the mathematics and/or ELA portion of the CAHSEE with the use of modifications; orExemption: The student has a current and valid IEP or Section 504 plan that indicates the student is scheduled to receive a high school diploma, has satisfied or will satisfy all other state and local graduation requirements on or after July 1, 2009. Students meeting the CAHSEE under theexemption shall take the CAHSEE in grade 10 for the purpose of meeting the federal requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

All grade ten students must participate in the CAHSEE to satisfy Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirements. The exemption from passing the CAHSEE for purposes of receiving a diploma of graduation does not affect the requirement of taking the CAHSEE in grade ten. Please note that students

Formatted: Font: Italic

Formatted: Font: Italic

Formatted: Underline

Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1+ Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"



Formatted: Font: 11 pt


with significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the California Alternate Performance Assessment (CAPA) satisfy participation in AYP and do not take the CAHSEE in grade ten. Students with significant cognitive disabilities that have an IEP or Section 504 plan generally participate in an alternative curriculum that has significantly modified grade-level standards. These students are not typically scheduled to receive a high school diploma. However, if the student has satisfied or will satisfy all other state and local graduation requirements on or after July 1, 2009, then the student would be exempt from passing the CAHSEE in order to earn a high school diploma. The student would then be awarded a diploma. Students who earn a high school diploma or reach age of 22 are no longer eligible to receive special education and related services.

Under the IDEA 2004, students are entitled to special education services until age 22 or until they receive a diploma. Thus, a LEA may be required to reopen and revise an IEP for a student who left high school without receiving a dipoma, if the student has not reached age 22. If appropriate, the IEP team may revise the IEP of an eligible student. Such appropriate revisions should include additional quality instruction to help the student pass the CAHSEE and may include receiving a diploma without passing the CAHSEE. If the revised IEP calls for receipt of a diploma after July 1, 2009, and the student has satisfied or will satisfy all other graduation requirements, then the student may be exempted From the CAHSEE requirement under the new statute. It is within the discretion of the IEP team to determine what revisions to the IEP, including further instruction, are appropriate for a particular student. A dispute over that determination would be subject to due process.

Students with only Section 504 plans do not have the same procedural protections as students with IEPs. Federal regulations indicate that one way to guarantee a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under Section 504 is to provide the same procedural protections as required under the IDEA. However, since the rules are not identical, LEA personnel should consult with local counsel when adopting or applyingpolicies regarding re-enrolling students with only Section 504 plans for purposes of receiving a diploma under the exemption statute.

For further information on the exemption, please refer to the Questions and Answers regarding the California High School Exit Examination Exemption for Eligible Students with Disabilities: California Education Code section 60852.3.

Federal Requirements - IDEA states:As appropriate, the State or LEA - (i) develops guidelines for the participation of students with disabilities in alternate assessments for those students who cannot participate in State and district-wide assessment programs; and (ii) develops and, beginning not later than July 1, 2000, conducts those alternate assessments.

Federal Requirements - Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act indicates: Guidance from the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education (April 2000):For students with disabilities whose IEP or Section 504 placement teams have determined that the standard State assessment would not appropriately show what these students know and are able to do, each State must have a statewide alternate assessment system or a comprehensive State policy governing locally developed alternate assessments. Alternate assessments must be valid, reliable, and to the maximum extent appropriate, aligned to State content and performance standards. In addition, States must monitor and collect data from LEAs to ensure the proper use of alternate assessments; they must publicly report the results of alternate assessments; and they must integrate the results of alternate assessments into their accountability systems.


Section B - Guidance for Making Accommodation DecisionsStatewide assessments have the following purpose: 1) to show how much a student has learned, 2) to reveal how successfully a school has educated its students, and 3) to help guide instructional improvement strategies. Since instructional and policy decisions are based on data from standards-based assessments, students with disabilities need to be included to the maximum extent possible. The following guidance offers information about the major assessment programs in California and specific information on how to provide test accommodations when needed.

The term “accommodation” is commonly used to define changes in format, response, timing, or scheduling that do not alter in any significant way what the test measures or the comparability of scores. When changes in the assessment alter what the test is supposed to measure or the comparability of scores, terms such as “modification,” “nonstandard administration” or “not allowed” are often used. Without accommodations, an assessment may not accurately measure the student’s knowledge and skills. The purpose of an accommodation is to level the playing field, not to provide an advantage to some students.

Decisions about accommodations should be made by the people who know the student’s strengths and weaknesses. It is important that the student and his/her parents are comfortable with the accommodations. Accommodations should be reviewed annually, and if necessary modified. Information about the student’s test behavior can guide future use of accommodations, such as, how the student responded and utilized the provided accommodation(s).

The following may be used as guidelines in making accommodation decisions:

Accommodations should facilitate an accurate demonstration of what the student knows or can do.Accommodations should not provide the student with an unfair advantage or interfere with the validity of a test; they must not change the underlying skills that are being measured by the test.Accommodations must be the same or nearly the same as adaptations used by the students in completing classroom assignments and classroom assessment activities.Accommodations must be necessary for enabling the student to demonstrate knowledge, ability, skills, or mastery.Accommodations must be familiar to the student and must not be used for the first time on State assessments.

Section C - Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP)The DRDP is the assessment component of the CDE Desired Results (DR) system. In 2000, the DR system was established within the CDE’s Child Development Division (CDD) to improve the quality of programs and services provided to young children, from early infancy through school age, who are enrolled in the thousands of center-based early care and education programs, before and after school programs, and family childcare home education network programs funded by CDD across California. The DRDP assessment is required twice per year for every child in all of these CDD-funded programs. The purpose of the DRDP is to inform and support the curricular decisions and program-improvement decisions made by teachers and program staff, and to inform and support the policy decisions made by stakeholders in early-childhood at the State and local levels.


DRDP is a system of authentic assessment for individual children. The teacher who knows the child best uses the broad range of DRDP observational protocols to record the specific levels of development that have been observed across multiple domains of development over at least 60 days of interaction with the child. DRDP is assessment that is embedded in program activities. The teacher is not required to set up activities for the purpose of assessment. DRDP includes observation during the developmentally age-appropriate play-based and instructional activities that are typical in high-quality programs and kindergarten classrooms.

Section D - Guide to the Accommodation Matrix: California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), California English Language Development Testing (CELDT), and Physical Fitness Testing (PFT)SELPA Form D/M 68L (Appendix D) was designed to help IEP and 504 teams make informed decisions about accommodations on State-wide assessments. It is not an exhaustive list of possible accommodations, but it gives an idea of how common accommodations mesh with the constructs of each of the major State-wide assessments. Please check the CDE website for regular updates on the testing matrices.

Who is eligible for accommodations?

Those accommodations designated as Category 1, may be described as flexibility in administration of the test and do not alter what is measured by the test. These accommodations are available for any student who uses the accommodation regularly for classroom instruction and/or assessment. Accommodations are not only for students receiving special education or 504 services, but these students are the only ones for whom the law requires that accommodations be provided. Even though Category 1 accommodations are available for all students, they should be documented in the IEP or 504 plans for those students with disabilities who need the accommodation to access the test and minimize the effects of their disability.

Accommodations designated as Category 2 are allowed only for students who have them documented in their IEP or 504 plans and are similar to those used by the student or classroom instruction and/or classroom assessment. In general, Category 2 accommodations require a more significant alteration in presentation, timing/scheduling, setting, or response and, in most cases, require more preplanning in order to ensure the availability of needed resources.

Modifications designated as Category 3, fundamentally alter what the test measures. They are available only to students with documentation in their IEP or Section 504 plans. Students who use a modification on any assessment are not included in the participation calculation for Annual Yearly Progress (AYP).

Eligible students may be permitted to take the CAHSEE with modifications if the modifications are specified in the student’s IEP or Section 504 plan for use during classroom instruction and assessment, on standardized testing, or on the CAHSEE.


Section E - Guide to the Accommodations Matrix: California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP)Signed into law on October 2, 2013, Assembly Bill 484 establishes the CAASPP. The provisions of AB 484 became effective January 1, 2014. The CAASPP system is based on the State’s new California Common Core Standards for English language arts (ELA) and mathematics adopted by the State Board of Education (SBE) in 2010. The CAASPP system replaces the Standardized Testing and Reporting (STAR) Program. The primary purpose of the CAASPP system is to assist teachers, administrators, and students and their parents by promoting high quality teaching and learning through the use of a variety of assessment approaches and item responses.

Types of support:

Embedded Supports are digitally-delivered features or settings available as part of the technology platform for the computer-administered CAASPP tests. These supports do not change or alter the construct being measured.

Non-embedded Supports are available, when provided by the LEA for either computer-administered or paper-pencil CAASPP tests. These supports are not part of the technology platform for the computer-administered CAASPP tests. These supports do not change or alter the construct being measured.

Who is eligible?

Universal Tools are available to all students. Students may turn the support(s) on/off when embedded as part of the technology platform for the computer-administered CAASPP tests or may choose to use it/them when provided as part of a paper-pencil test.

Designated Supports are features that are available for use by any student for whom the need has been indicated prior to the assessment, by an educator or group of educators.

Accommodations are available for eligible students if specified in the student’s IEP or 504 plan.

Accessibility SupportsIndividualized Aids are not Universal Tools, Designated Supports, or Accommodations. Individualized Aids are available if specified in the eligible student’s IEP or 504 plan. Accessibility Supports may or may not have been previously identified. Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 853.5(h) identifies non-embedded accessibility supports for English language arts, mathematics, science and primary language. The CDE has developed a CAASPP Accessibility Supports Request Form for LEAs to request the use of such non-embedded accessibility supports. To access the CDE request form go to http://californiatac.org/administration/forms/index.html.

If an IEP team or Section 504 plan identifies and designates a resource not identified in the CAASPP Matrix, the test site coordinator may submit the CAASPP Individualized Aid Request Form. Approval is granted by the CDE for use of this unidentified aid based on the IEP team’s and/or Section 504 plan’s designation and if the individualized aid does not compromise the test’s integrity or security. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), in concert with the CDE, shall make a determination of whether the requested individualized aid changes the construct being measured (outside of this approval process). This determination will be done after all testing has been completed.


IEP teams should be made aware of the impact of the use of accessibility supportsindividualized aidspursuant to Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations section 853.5(h), but should not allow the impact of the LEA’s accountability to outweigh the needs of the student.

5 C.C.R. 853.5(h) states the use of “accessibility supportsindividualized aids that change the construct being measured by a CAASPP test invalidate the test score and results in a score that cannot be compared with other CAASPP results. Scores for pupils’ tests with accessibility supportsindividualized aids that change the construct being measured by a CAASPP test will not be counted as participating in statewide testing (and impacts the accountability participation rate indicator) but pupils will receive an individual score report with their actual score (raw score).”

Information about the purpose of the CAASPP Individualized Aid Request Form and the online submission is available on the CAASPP Test Administration web page at http://californiatac.org/administration/forms/index.html. The form must be submitted 10 business days prior to the student’s first day of testing. The CDE will reply to the request within four business days.

Section F - An Overview of Alternate AssessmentIDEA 2004 and similar amendments to California law require the inclusion of students with disabilities in general State and district-wide assessment programs with appropriate accommodations, where necessary. Alternate assessment is required for students with severe disabilities who cannot participate in general larger-scale assessment programs. The law states:

“As appropriate, the State or local educational agency - (i) develops guidelines for the participation of children with disabilities in alternate assessments for those children whocannot participate in State and district wide assessment programs; and (ii) develops and, beginning no later than July 1, 2000, conducts those alternate assessments.”

There are additional specific requirements to report the number of children in alternate assessments, report the performance of children on alternate assessments after July 1, 2000, if doing so would be statistically sound and not disclose the results of individual children, ensure that IEP teams determine how each student will participate in large-scale assessment, and if not participating, describe how the student will be assessed, and reflect the performance of all students with disabilities in performance goals and indicators that are used to guide State Improvement Plans.

An estimated 10-20% of students with disabilities, or 1-2% of the general student population, will be unable to participate in the CAASPP Program even with accommodations, and therefore must receive an alternate assessment. In determining the assessment procedure to be used for any student, the student’s curriculum should drive the choice. The IEP team should consider:

whether the student participates in an academic or functional curriculumthe types of instructional modifications employed by the studentwhether the student is working toward a standard high school diplomathe preference of the parentwhere applicable, the preference of the studentthe input from other involved agencies

Formatted: Tab stops: 6.5", Left

Formatted: Font: Not Bold


The decision should not be influenced by the student’s social, cultural or economic background, attendance, or previous record of achievement. Any decisions regarding accommodations, participation in alternate assessment or exemption by parental request must be documented in the IEP.

The following information appeared in The Special Edge, Summer 2000, Volume 13, Number 2, as an accompaniment to “Accountability in the Classroom” by Judy Elliott.

What does an alternate assessment evaluate?The current framework that exists for alternate assessments, developed by the National Center on Educational Outcomes, identifies six areas for alternate assessments to evaluate: academic and functional literacy, physical health, responsibility and independence, citizenship, personal and social well-being, and satisfaction.

For whom are alternate assessments designed?Students who have significant cognitive disabilities are eligible for alternate assessments. As a rule, these students do not meet the same requirements as those for students who are graduating with a regular high school diploma. Instead, these students are working on life skills curricula. Many of them are preparing for a future that includes supported employment, sheltered workshops, group homes, or supervised independent living arrangements.

How does alternate assessment differ from alternative assessment?An alternative assessment is simply a means of assessing what a student has learned in a manner that departs from more traditional approaches, like multiple-choice tests. Forms of alternative assessment include portfolios, dramatic presentations, and various types of exhibits and demonstrations. These assessments, when rigorously aligned with a school’scurriculum, and academic and performance standards, are appropriate for all students.

How does alternate assessment differ from eligibility assessment?The most familiar type of assessment in special education is the one used to determine whether or not a student is eligible for special education services. This form of evaluation serves a purpose entirely different from those assessments that demonstrate the academic success or ranking of a student. Eligibility or identification assessments can help to locate those students who need special services.

California’s Guidelines for Alternate Assessments:

Those special education or 504 students who are not able to take large-scale assessments, even with accommodations, should take the alternate assessment. It is anticipated only 1% of all students or 10% of students receiving special education will take alternate assessments. The decision is individualized and made by the 504 team or IEP team. Currently, the alternate assessment assigns each IEP goal to a functional life skill content area.

At this time, there are 24 states participating in the National Center and State Collaborative (NCSC) project to build an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards (AA-AAS) for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities. The goal of the NCSC is to ensure that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities achieve increasingly higher academic outcomes and leave high school ready for post-secondary options. For updates regarding the AA-AAS, go to www.ncspartners.org.

Chapter 16 - State and District Assessment Programs, Desert/Mountain SELPA Page 9As of 8/15/2014

APPENDIX A

Memo from Dr. Alice Parker dated March 14, 2000http:// www cde.ca.gov/spbranch/sed/ofcimem/om031400.htm

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SPECIAL EDUCATION DIVISION

MEMORANDUMTO: Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA)

State-Operated Programs (SOP) Directors/AdministratorsSpecial Education Administrator at County Offices (SEACO)

DATE: March 14, 2000

FROM: Dr. Alice D. Parker, Assistant Superintendent Director, Special Education

SUBJECT: Differential Proficiency Standards and the High School Exit Exam

Senate Bill 2 (Chapter 1, Statutes of 1999), approved by the Governor in March 1999, stated that “Local proficiency standards established pursuant to Section 51215 of the Education Code are generally set below a high school level and are not consistent with state adopted academic content standards.” Section 4 of Senate Bill 2 stated that “Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 51215 of Part 28 of the Education Code shall become inoperative on July 31, 1999, and as of January 1, 2000, is repealed.”

The repealed Section 51215 of the Education Code required local districts to adopt differential proficiency standards and assessment procedures for students who were enrolled in special education programs as determined by an IEP team. The old law prohibited a student with disabilities from receiving a regular diploma of graduation from high school if he or she had not met the differential proficiency standards prescribed by the school district. On January 1, 2000, California’s requirement that local boards adopt differential proficiency standards was repealed. California’s prohibition from receiving a regular diploma if those differential standards were unmet no longer exists.

Education Code Section 60851 (a), beginning in the 2003/04 school year, requires each student completing grade 12 to successfully pass a high school exit examination adopted by the State Board of Education as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation or a condition of graduation from high school. The exit examination shall be offered to individuals with exceptional needs in accordance with the requirements of state and federal law with appropriate accommodations where necessary.

Although the state no longer requires differential proficiency standards, districts may at their discretion continue to use differential proficiency standards described in the IEP as a local policy. Whether or not a district retains local differential proficiency standards, beginning in 2003/04, all students must pass the high school exit examination in order to receive a regular diploma. Of course, students who do not receive a regular diploma, or who receive any document other than a regular diploma, are entitled to FAPE if they are in the eligible age range.

Assembly Bill 1062 (Chapter 392, Statutes of 1999) added Section 56375 to the Education Code requiring that an individual with exceptional needs who meets locally approved criteria for a certificate or document of educational achievement is eligible to participate in any graduation ceremony in which a


APPENDIX Apupil of similar age without disabilities would be eligible to participate. However, the right to participate in graduation ceremonies does not equate a certificate or document of educational achievement with a regular diploma.

Questions and Answers Excerpted from “Individuals with Disabilities Education Law Report”(Special Report No. 18, LRP Publications)

Question: Are students with disabilities subject to the high school exit exam or other state and district requirements for graduation?

Answer: Assuming that adequate prior notice has been provided, identified students will be subject to the high school exit exam requirements, course requirements, or other district or statewide requirements.

Question: Does a student who completes IEP goals and objectives automatically graduate with a diploma?

Answer: The state and district establish high school graduation requirements. If the IEP goals do not meet the diploma requirements, the student does not have a reasonable expectation of receiving a diploma.

Questions: Can a district’s local diploma requirements be waived for students with disabilities?Answer: A waiver of local requirements is an option for districts, not a mandate. If the district

chooses to waive local requirements, adequate prior notice has been provided, and such modification is made on the IEP, the student may meet local requirements for graduation. However, beginning in the 2003/04 school years, the state’s requirement to pass the high school exit exam must be met in order to graduate.

Question: What is a “reasonable” accommodation?Answer: A reasonable accommodation is generally defined as changes in the testing materials,

administration, or procedures in order to provide students with disabilities an equal opportunity to participate when those changes do not lower or substantially alter the standards.

Question: Are accommodations permitted that substantially alter or lower the standards?Answer: Under IDEA ’97, such accommodations would only be appropriate for a small

percentage of students who are enrolled in alternate programs and would necessarily lead to alternate grading and graduation standards. Currently, there are no alternate statewide standards for graduation in California.

Question: How are decisions about accommodations made?Answer: The selection of accommodations must be made on an individual basis. IDEA ’97

specifies that the IEP team should make these decisions, thereby providing parents with notice and the opportunity to accept or reject the district’s proposal.

Question: How do student needs and the right to a FAPE balance with tougher district and statewide standards for graduation?

Answer: On one side, it would be discrimination if the disability of an otherwise qualified student-prevented demonstration of his or her learning. On the other side, states and districts are not required to lower or substantially modify standards to accommodate students with


APPENDIX Adisabilities. Striking a balance requires that districts: 1) establish district wide, school wide standards and/or implement statewide standards for all students; 2) provide adequate advance notice to all students so they have a reasonable time to prepare (opportunity to learn) or to make an informed decision that the student will not pursue a regular diploma; and 3) make individualized decisions, considering the student’s needs for accommodations and what is appropriate. A key issue is whether the student has had the opportunity to learn the material on the test. Assuming that adequate advance notice has been provided and a decision is made to pursue a regular diploma, students must receive instruction that covers the skills and knowledge required.

If you have questions or need further clarification, please contact Mark Fetler, Assessment, Evaluation, and Support Unit at mfetler cde.ca.gov or (916) 322-0373.

ReferencesEC §§ 56345(a), 56375, 56376, 60641(b), 60850(a), 60851

California Department of Education (http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/cahseefaqexempt.asp)Page Generated: 7/27/2015 11:34:50 AM

Questions and Answers regarding the California High School Exit Examination Exemption for Eligible Studentswith Disabilities: California Education Code, Section 60852.3.

What is California Education Code (EC) Section 60852.3?1.Should students with disabilities, who are eligible for the exemption, be encouraged to continue taking theCAHSEE?

2.

Do students need to have a specific disability to be eligible for the exemption?3.How long will this exemption be in effect?4.May a student with a disability who left high school between January 1, 2008 and July 1, 2009, without a diplo(because he or she did not pass CAHSEE), be allowed to re-enroll in high school and receive a diploma undelaw?

5.

Does this exemption apply to students with disabilities with an individual education program (IEP) or a Sectionplan who completed all graduation requirements, except passing the CAHSEE, and received a certificate ofcompletion in 2008 or 2009?

6.

Is a student enrolled in an adult school eligible for the exemption?7.May a local educational agency adopt an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan for the spurpose of exempting the student from the CAHSEE requirement?

8.

Does the individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan need to document whether or not the stuis exempt from passing the CAHSEE?

9.

What are the three pathways that students with an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 planuse to meet the CAHSEE requirement?

10.

May local educational agencies require students with disabilities to take the CAHSEE beyond grade ten until tpass or score at least 350 with modifications and qualify for a waiver?

11.

Is there any required notification to the parents/guardians, local boards of education, the State Board of Educa(SBE), or the California Department of Education (CDE) regarding which students are eligible for the exemptio

12.

Must students with disabilities currently in grade ten take the CAHSEE?13.Are students with significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the California Alternate PerformanceAssessment (CAPA) eligible for the exemption?

14.

Does this exemption affect instructional practices or intensive intervention courses?15.

1. What is EC Section 60852.3?

Beginning with 2009–10 school year, California Education Code Section 60852.3 provides an exemption from meetinCAHSEE requirement as a condition of receiving a diploma of graduation for eligible students with disabilities who haan individualized education program (IEP) or a Section 504 plan. The IEP or Section 504 plans must state that the stis scheduled to receive a high school diploma, and has satisfied or will satisfy all other state and local requirements fohigh school graduation, on or after July 1, 2009.

2. Should students with disabilities, who are eligible for the exemption, be encouraged to continue to attemppass the CAHSEE?

Yes, the CAHSEE represents academic standards which all students should be encouraged to meet. Students who aeligible for the exemption allowed by California Education Code Section 60852.3 are required to take the CAHSEE ingrade ten to fulfill the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Students should continue to take CAHSEE, and to receive appropriate remedial instruction, as it is not prohibited by the law. However, as described bestudents who are eligible for the exemption may not be required to pass the CAHSEE in order to receive a diploma.Furthermore, local educational agencies are strongly encouraged to continue to offer remedial instruction and accessthe CAHSEE.

Exemption for Eligible Students with Disabilities - California High Scho... http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/cahseefaqexempt.asp?print=yes

1 of 4 7/27/2015 11:35 AM

APPENDIX B

3. Do students need to have a specific disability to be eligible for the exemption?

California Education Code Section 60852.3 provides that any student with disabilities (any type of disability, for anyduration) who has an individualized education program or a Section 504 plan, and meets all requirements for theexemption, is exempt from meeting the CAHSEE requirement as a condition of graduation.

4. How long will this exemption be in effect?

California Education Code Section 60852.3(b) states that this exemption will last until the State Board of Education (Smakes either a determination that alternative means to the CAHSEE for students with disabilities are not feasible or salternative means have been implemented.

5. May a student with a disability who left high school between January 1, 2008 and July 1, 2009, without adiploma (because he or she did not pass CAHSEE), be allowed to re-enroll in high school and receive a diplounder this law?

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), students are entitled to special education services until atwenty-two or until they receive a diploma. Thus, a local educational agency (LEA) may be required to reopen and rean individualized education program (IEP) for a student who left high school without receiving a diploma, if the studenhas not reached age twenty-two. If appropriate, the IEP team may revise the IEP of an eligible student. Such approprrevisions should include additional quality instruction to help the student pass the CAHSEE and may include receivindiploma without passing the CAHSEE. If the revised IEP calls for receipt of a diploma after July 1, 2009, and the studhas satisfied or will satisfy all other graduation requirements, then the student may be exempted from the CAHSEErequirement under the new statute. It is within the discretion of the IEP team to determine what revisions to the IEP,including further instruction, are appropriate for a particular student. A dispute over that determination would be subjedue process.

Students with only Section 504 plans do not have the same procedural protections as students with IEPs. Federalregulations indicate that one way to guarantee Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) under Section 504 is to prothe same procedural protections as required under the IDEA. However, since the rules are not identical, LEA personnshould consult with local counsel when adopting or applying policies regarding re-enrolling students with only Sectionplans for purposes of receiving a diploma under the exemption statute.

6. Does this exemption apply to students with disabilities with an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan who completed all graduation requirements, except passing the CAHSEE, and received acertificate of completion in 2008 or 2009?

Yes, students with an IEP or a Section 504 plan who completed all graduation requirements, except passing theCAHSEE, and received a certificate of completion in 2008 or 2009, are eligible for this exemption as described in que5 above.

7. Is a student enrolled in an adult school eligible for the exemption?

A student enrolled in an adult school offered by a kindergarten through grade twelve (K-12) local educational agencyleft high school without receiving a diploma, should be treated the same as any other student described in questions and 6 above.

8. May a local educational agency adopt an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan for thsole purpose of exempting the student from the CAHSEE requirement?

No, the new law expressly prohibits adopting an IEP or Section 504 plan for that purpose if the student is or was notpreviously eligible for special education and related services.

9. Does the individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 plan need to document whether or not thestudent is exempt from passing the CAHSEE?


2 of 4 7/27/2015 11:35 AM

APPENDIX B

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requthat the IEP or Section 504 plan address how the student will participate in statewide assessments. If a student withdisabilities will not be taking the CAHSEE this year, that should be noted in the IEP or Section 504 plan and should sthat the student will meet the CAHSEE requirement through the exemption.

10. What are the three pathways that students with an individualized education program (IEP) or Section 504 can use to meet the CAHSEE requirement?

Pass the CAHSEE - The student scores 350 or higher on the mathematics and English-language arts (ELA) portionsthe CAHSEE with the use of accommodations but without the use of modifications.

Request a local waiver - The student scores 350 or higher on the mathematics and/or ELA portion of the CAHSEE wthe use of modifications. More information about the CAHSEE local waiver for students with disabilities can be foundthe CDE Q and A for Test Variations Web page.

Exemption - The student has a current and valid IEP or Section 504 plan that indicates the student is scheduled toreceive a high school diploma, has satisfied or will satisfy all other state and local graduation requirements on or afte1, 2009. Students using this pathway to meet the CAHSEE requirement shall take the CAHSEE in grade ten for thepurpose of meeting the federal requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

11. May local educational agencies require students with disabilities to take the CAHSEE beyond grade ten uthey pass or score at least 350 with modifications and qualify for a waiver?

No, the student’s right to an exemption is state law and local educational agencies do not have authority to impose threquirement locally. However, as discussed above, a student should be encouraged to continue to take the CAHSEEappropriate instructional support as addressed in a revised individual education program or Section 504 plan.

12. Is there any required notification to parents/guardians, local boards of education, the State Board ofEducation (SBE), or the California Department of Education (CDE) regarding which students are eligible for texemption?

California Education Code Section 60852.3 does not require that parents, local boards of education, the SBE, or the be notified regarding which students are eligible for the exemption. Eligibility is determined by the individual educatioprogram or Section 504 plan team of which the parent/guardian is a member. Local educational agencies may develotheir own forms for internal purposes. Parent/guardian notification with regard to this exemption should be treated likeother issue affecting eligibility for special education.

13. Must students with disabilities take the CAHSEE in grade ten?

All grade ten students must participate in the CAHSEE to satisfy Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) requirements. Theexemption from passing the CAHSEE for purposes of receiving a diploma of graduation does not affect the requiremetaking the CAHSEE in grade ten.

Note: Students with significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the California Alternate Performance Assessme(CAPA) satisfy participation in AYP and do not take the CAHSEE in grade ten.

14. Are students with significant cognitive disabilities who participate in the CAPA eligible for the exemption

Students with significant cognitive disabilities that have an individualized education program or Section 504 plan geneparticipate in an alternative curriculum that has significantly modified grade-level standards. These students are nottypically scheduled to receive a high school diploma. However, if the student has satisfied or will satisfy all other statelocal graduation requirements on or after July 1, 2009, then the student would be exempt from passing the CAHSEE order to earn a high school diploma. The student would then be awarded a diploma.

Note: Students who earn a high school diploma or reach age twenty-two are no longer eligible to receive specialeducation support and services.


3 of 4 7/27/2015 11:35 AM

APPENDIX B

15. Does this exemption affect instructional practices or intensive intervention courses?

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and Section 504 require access to grade-level curriculum.Therefore, the exemption of the requirement to pass the CAHSEE should not limit students’ access to the generalcurriculum.

Local educational agencies are encouraged to continue providing intensive instruction.

Questions: High School & Physical Fitness Assessment Office | [email protected] | 916-445-9449

Last Reviewed: Tuesday, April 7, 2015


4 of 4 7/27/2015 11:35 AM

APPENDIX B

Stud

ent N

ame:

DO

B:

Dat

e:TE

STIN

G A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

NS

(CA

ASP

P)

D/M

68L

Rev

. 0/1

5Pa

ge _

___

of _

___

UN

IVE

RS

AL

TO

OL

(U

) /

DE

SIG

NA

TE

D S

UP

PO

RT

S (

D)

/ A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N (

A)

PAR

T 1:

EM

BED

DED

SU

PPO

RTS

Engl

ish L

angu

age A

rts R

eadi

ngEn

glish

Lan

guag

e Arts

Writ

ing

Engl

ish L

angu

age A

rts L

isten

ing

Math

emat

icsAm

erica

n Sign

Lang

uage

(ASL

)N/

AN/

AA

ABr

aille

AA

AA

Brea

ksU

UU

U

Calcu

lator

N/A

N/A

N/A

U(fo

r spe

cific

items

)Cl

osed

Cap

tionin

gN/

AN/

AA

N/A

Color

Con

trast

DD

DD

Digit

al No

tepad

UU

UU

Engli

sh D

iction

ary

N/A

U(fo

r ELA

-per

form

ance

task

-long

essa

y(s),

not s

hort

para

grap

h res

pons

es)

N/A

N/A

Engli

sh G

lossa

ryU

UU

UEx

pand

able

Pass

ages

UU

UU

Glob

al No

tesN/

AU

(for E

LA-p

erfor

man

ce ta

sk-lo

ng es

say(s

), no

t sho

rt pa

ragr

aph r

espo

nses

)N/

AN/

A

High

lighte

rU

UU

UKe

yboa

rd N

aviga

tion

UU

UU

Mark

for R

eview

UU

UU

Mask

ingD

DD

D

Math

Tools

(i.e.,

embe

dded

ruler

, emb

edde

d pro

tracto

r)N/

AN/

AN/

AU

(for s

pecif

ic ite

ms)

Spell

Che

ckN/

AU

(for s

pecif

ic ite

ms)

N/A

N/A

Stre

amlin

ingA

AA

ASt

riketh

roug

hU

UU

U

Text-

to-Sp

eech

D(fo

r item

s, no

t pas

sage

s)D

D D

A(fo

r ELA

read

ing pa

ssag

es, G

rade

s 6-8

an

d 11)

Tran

slated

Tes

t Dire

ction

sN/

AN/

AN/

AD

Tran

slatio

ns (G

lossa

ry)N/

AN/

AN/

AD

Tran

slatio

ns (S

tacke

d)N/

AN/

AN/

AD

Turn

Off A

ny U

niver

sal T

ool

DD

DD

Writi

ng T

ools

(i.e., b

old, it

alic,

bulle

ts, un

do/re

do)

N/A

U(fo

r spe

cific

items

)N/

AN/

AZo

om (in

/out)

UU

UU

Purp

ose

and

Use:

This

docu

ment

displa

ys th

e un

iversa

l too

ls, d

esign

ated

supp

orts,

and

acc

ommo

datio

ns (e

mbed

ded

and

non-

embe

dded

) allo

wed

as p

art o

f the

Cali

fornia

Ass

essm

ent o

f Stud

ent P

erfor

manc

e an

d Pr

ogre

ss (C

AASP

P). T

his d

ocum

ent

shou

ld be

use

d in

conju

nctio

n wi

th the

Sma

rter B

alanc

ed A

sses

smen

t Con

sortiu

m: U

sabil

ity, A

cces

sibilit

y, an

d Acc

ommo

datio

ns G

uideli

nesa

nd th

e Ca

liforn

ia Co

de of

Reg

ulatio

ns, T

itle 5

, sec

tions

850

to 8

68, in

the

deter

mina

tion

of su

ppor

ts for

indiv

idual

stude

nts. T

he ap

prop

riate

use o

f emb

edde

d and

non-

embe

dded

unive

rsal to

ols, d

esign

ated s

uppo

rts, a

nd/or

acco

mmod

ation

s on C

AASP

P tes

ts ar

e res

tricted

to on

ly tho

se id

entifi

ed in

this

docu

ment.

EMBE

DDED

SUP

PORT

S:Di

gitall

y-deli

vere

d fea

tures

/settin

gs a

vaila

ble a

s pa

rt of

the te

chno

logy

platfo

rm fo

r the

co

mpute

r-adm

iniste

red C

AASP

P tes

ts. T

hese

supp

orts

do no

t cha

nge o

r alte

r the

cons

truct

being

mea

sure

d.NO

N EM

BEDD

ED S

UPOR

TS:S

uppo

rts a

vaila

ble, w

hen

prov

ided

by th

e Lo

cal E

duca

tiona

l Age

ncy

(LEA

), for

eith

er

comp

uter-a

dmini

stere

d or

pap

er-p

encil

CAAS

PP te

sts. T

hese

sup

ports

are

not

part

of the

tech

nolog

y pla

tform

for t

he

comp

uter-a

dmini

stere

d CAA

SPP

tests.

The

se su

ppor

ts do

not c

hang

e or a

lter t

he co

nstru

ct be

ing m

easu

red.

INDI

VIDU

ALIZ

ED A

IDS:

Indivi

duali

zed a

ids a

re no

t univ

ersa

l tools

, des

ignate

d sup

ports

, or a

ccom

moda

tions

. If an

IEP

or S

ectio

n 50

4 Pl

an d

esign

ates a

reso

urce

not

identi

fied

in the

testi

ng m

atrix,

the

LEA

may s

ubmi

t the

onli

ne C

AASP

P Ind

ividu

alize

d Aid

Requ

est F

orm

to the

CDE

for a

ppro

val.G

o to h

ttp://c

aasp

p.org

/admi

nistra

tion/f

orms

/inde

x.htm

l

UNIV

ERSA

L TO

OLS

(U):

Tools

avail

able

for A

LL st

uden

ts. S

tuden

ts ma

y tur

n the

supp

ort(s

) on/o

ff whe

n em

bedd

ed a

s par

t of

the te

chno

logy p

latfor

m for

the c

ompu

ter-a

dmini

stere

d CA

ASPP

tests

or m

ay ch

oose

to u

se it/

them

when

pro

vided

as pa

rt of

a pap

er-p

encil

test.

DESI

GNAT

ED S

UPPO

RTS

(D):

Featu

res a

vaila

ble fo

r use

by an

y stud

ent fo

r who

m the

need

has b

een

indica

ted pr

ior to

the

asse

ssme

nt, b

y an

edu

cator

or g

roup

of e

duca

tors.

Engli

sh le

arners

(ELs

) sha

ll be

perm

itted

those

listed

emb

edde

d / n

on

embe

dded

desig

nated

supp

orts,

whe

n dete

rmine

d for

use b

y an e

duca

tor or

grou

p of e

duca

tors,

who m

ay se

ek in

put fr

om a

pare

nt/gu

ardia

n, on

the C

AASP

P tes

t.AC

COMM

ODAT

IONS

(A):

Eligi

ble s

tuden

ts sh

all b

e pe

rmitte

d to

take

the te

sts w

ith a

ccom

moda

tions

if s

pecif

ied in

the

stude

nt’s I

EP or

Sec

tion 5

04 P

lan.

APP

END

IX C

Stud

ent N

ame:

DO

B:

Dat

e:TE

STIN

G A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

NS

(CA

ASP

P)

D/M

68L

Rev

. 0/1

5Pa

ge _

___

of _

___

UN

IVE

RS

AL

TO

OL

(U

) /

DE

SIG

NA

TE

D S

UP

PO

RT

(D

) /

AC

CO

MM

OD

AT

ION

(A

)PA

RT

2: N

ON

-EM

BED

DED

SU

PPO

RTS

Engl

ish L

angu

age A

rts

Read

ing

Engl

ish L

angu

age A

rts

Writ

ing

Engl

ish L

angu

age A

rts

List

enin

gMa

them

atics

Scien

ce(C

ST an

d CM

A)(S

TS fo

r Rea

ding

La

ngua

ge A

rts)

Admi

nistra

tion o

f the t

est to

the s

tuden

t at th

e mos

t ben

eficia

l time

of

day

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

D (in

clude

s Eng

lish L

earn

ers)

Abac

usN/

AN/

ANA

AA

N/A

Alter

nate

Resp

onse

Opti

ons (

includ

es ad

apted

keyb

oard

s, lar

ge

keyb

oard

s, St

ickyK

eys,

Mous

eKey

s, Fil

terKe

ys, a

dapte

d mou

se,

touch

scre

en, h

ead w

and,

and s

witch

es)

A A

A A

N/A

N/A

Amer

ican S

ign La

ngua

ge (A

SL)

D(fo

r item

s, no

t pas

sage

s)A

A A

A A

(for it

ems,

not p

assa

ges)

A(fo

r ELA

read

ing pa

ssag

es,

Grad

es 6-

8 and

11)

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rsN/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rsN/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rs

Bilin

gual

Dicti

onar

yN/

AD

(for E

LA-p

erfor

man

ce ta

sk-

long e

ssay

(s), n

ot sh

ort

para

grap

h res

pons

es)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Brea

ksU

UU

UU

UBr

aille

(pap

er-p

encil

tests

)A

AA

AA

ACa

lculat

orN/

AN/

AN/

AA

(for s

pecif

ic ite

ms)

N/A

N/A

Color

Con

trast

DD

DD

N/A

N/A

Color

Ove

rlay

D D

D D

UU

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rsN/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

Engli

sh D

iction

ary

N/A

U(fo

r ELA

-per

form

ance

task

-lon

g ess

ay(s)

, not

shor

t pa

ragr

aph r

espo

nses

)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Larg

e-pr

int ve

rsion

s of p

aper

-pen

cil te

st (a

s ava

ilable

)A

AA

AA

AMa

gnific

ation

DD

DD

DD

Math

Tools

(i.e.,

non-

embe

dded

ruler

, non

-emb

edde

d pro

tracto

r)N/

AN/

ANA

U(fo

r spe

cific

items

)N/

AN/

A

Multip

licati

on T

able

N/A

N/A

N/A

A(b

eginn

ing in

Gra

de 4)

N/A

N/A

Noise

buffe

rs (e

.g., in

dividu

al ca

rrel o

r stud

y enc

losur

e or n

oise-

canc

eling

head

phon

es)

D D

D D

D D

Print

on D

eman

dA

AA

AN/

AN/

A

Read

Alou

dD

(for it

ems,

not p

assa

ges)

D D

D A

A A

(for E

LA re

ading

pass

ages

)N/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rsSc

ratch

Pap

erU

UU

UU

U

Scrib

eD

AD

D A

AN/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

N/A

Engli

sh Le

arne

rsN/

AEn

glish

Lear

ners

Sepa

rate

Settin

gD

D D

D D

(inclu

des E

nglis

h Lea

rner

s)D

(inclu

des E

nglis

h Lea

rner

s)

Simp

lified

or cl

arifie

d tes

t adm

inistr

ation

dire

ction

s (do

es no

t app

ly to

test q

uesti

ons)

U U

U U

U U

APP

END

IX C

Stud

ent N

ame:

DO

B:

Dat

e:TE

STIN

G A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

NS

(CA

ASP

P)

D/M

68L

Rev

. 0/1

5Pa

ge _

___

of _

___

UN

IVE

RS

AL

TO

OL

(U

) /

DE

SIG

NA

TE

D S

UP

PO

RT

S (

D)

/ A

CC

OM

MO

DA

TIO

N (

A)

PAR

T 2:

NO

N-E

MB

EDD

ED S

UPP

OR

TSEn

glish

Lan

guag

e Arts

Re

adin

gEn

glish

Lan

guag

e Arts

W

ritin

gEn

glish

Lan

guag

e Arts

Li

sten

ing

Math

emat

icsSc

ience

(CST

and

CMA)

(STS

for R

eadi

ng

Lang

uage

Arts

)Sp

ecial

lighti

ng or

acou

stics

, ass

istive

devic

es (s

pecif

ic de

vices

ma

y req

uire C

alifor

nia A

sses

smen

t of S

tuden

t Per

forma

nce a

nd

Prog

ress

(CAA

SPP)

contr

actor

certif

icatio

n), a

nd/or

spec

ial or

ad

aptiv

e fur

nitur

eD

D D

D D

D

Spee

ch-to

-Tex

tA

AA

AA

ASt

uden

t mar

ks in

pape

r-pen

cil te

st bo

oklet

(othe

r tha

n res

pons

es

includ

ing hi

ghlig

hting

)U

U U

U U

U

Thes

auru

sN/

AU

(for E

LA-p

erfor

man

ce ta

sk-

long e

ssay

(s), n

ot sh

ort

para

grap

hres

pons

es)

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Tran

slated

Tes

t Dire

ction

sN/

AN/

AN/

AD

DD

Tran

slatio

ns (G

lossa

ry)N/

AN/

AN/

A

D

D D

DEn

glish

Lear

ners

(for o

nly th

e 10 l

angu

ages

su

ppor

ted by

the S

BAC)

The u

se of

Indiv

iduali

zed A

ids ca

n be r

eque

sted

**

**

**

* USE

OF

IND

IVID

UA

LIZE

DA

IDS

Infor

matio

n abo

ut the

purp

ose a

nd u

se of

the C

alifor

nia A

sses

smen

t of S

tuden

t Per

forma

nce a

nd P

rogr

ess (

CAAS

PP) I

ndivi

duali

zed A

id Re

ques

t For

m an

don

line s

ubmi

ssion

is av

ailab

le on

the C

AASP

P we

bsite

at

http:/

/caas

pp.or

g/adm

inistr

ation

/form

s/ind

ex.ht

ml.T

he LE

A CA

ASPP

Coo

rdina

tor sh

all co

mplet

e and

subm

it this

form

onlin

e to t

he C

alifor

nia D

epar

tmen

t of E

duca

tion (

CDE)

for a

ppro

val. T

here

ques

t form

mus

t be

subm

itted

ten (1

0) b

usine

ss d

ays

prior

to th

e stu

dent’

s firs

t day

of t

estin

g. Th

e CD

Ewi

ll rep

ly to

the re

ques

t with

in fou

r (4)

bus

iness

day

s. Ap

prov

als w

ill be

gra

nted

if the

indiv

iduali

zed

aid re

ques

tdoe

s not

comp

romi

se te

st int

egrity

or se

curity

.

APP

END

IX C

DIRE

CTIO

NS

CAHS

EECE

LDT

PFT

** ** **

APP

END

IX D

DIRE

CTIO

NS

CAHS

EECE

LDT

PFT

** NOTE

:

Test

Var

iatio

n (1

)Ac

com

mod

atio

n (2

)

Modi

ficat

ion

(3)

TYPE

OF

DRDP

:C

ode

A -I

FSP

(Con

tinue

to re

ceiv

e in

fant

/todd

ler s

peci

al e

duca

tion

serv

ices

; tra

nsiti

on to

pre

scho

ol; e

xit s

peci

al e

duca

tion

serv

ices

)C

ode

B -I

EP

(Con

tinue

to re

ceiv

e pr

esch

ool s

peci

al e

duca

tion

serv

ices

; tra

nsiti

on to

tran

sitio

nal k

inde

rgar

ten;

tran

sitio

n to

kin

derg

arte

n; e

xit s

peci

al e

duca

tion

serv

ices

)

APP

END

IX D

Chapter 25:Guidelines for Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE)

SECTION A INTRODUCTION / CONSIDERATION OF IEEs

SECTION B PROCEDURES FOR PARENTS REQUESTING AN IEE AT PUBLIC EXPENSE

SECTION C CRITERIA FOR OBTAINING AN IEE AT PUBLIC EXPENSE

SECTION D CRITERIA FOR DETERMINATION OF IEE FEES

SECTION E CIRCUMSTANCES RESULTING IN EVALUATIONS NOT FUNDED AT LEA EXPENSE

APPENDIX A NOTICE TO PARENTS REGARDING IEEs

APPENDIX B NON-EXCUSIVE LIST OF QUALIFIED EXAMINERS

APPENDIX C SUGGESTED GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX D TEST PROTOCOLS (OSEP POLICY LETTER)

APPENDIX E REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST (SELPA FORM D/M 83)

Legal References

CA Education Code Sections56320, 56322, 56327

34 Code of Federal Regulations300.502(a), 300.502(b), 300.502(e)

Last Updated:08/28/2015


Chapter 25 - Guidelines for Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE), Desert/Mountain SELPA Page 2As of 08/28/2015 DRAFT

IntroductionAn independent educational evaluation (IEE) is an evaluation conducted by a qualified examiner who is not employed by the local education agency (LEA) or public agency responsible for the education of the student [34 C.F.R. 300.502]. Since a student’s educational program and placement are determined by the results of assessments, parents who disagree with a LEA’s evaluation have the right to obtain an IEE at public expense to identify the student’s disabilities and resulting educational needs. A parent is entitled to only one IEE at public expense each time the LEA conducts an evaluation with which the parent disagrees [34 C.F.R. 300.502].

Each participating LEA within the Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) is provided with a yearly stipend to help offset the expenses for Assistive Technology Assessments (ATAs) and Independent Educational Evaluations (IEEs). This process, adopted in May 2004, enables LEAs to request such assessments independent of the SELPA. No prior approval is required by the SELPA. Inorder to be reimbursed for the cost of an ATA or IEE, the LEA must complete the SELPA reimbursement form (D/M 83) and supporting documentation, and submit the reimbursement form to the SELPA before the end of each fiscal year. The disagreement of LEA’s evaluation has a two-year window.

Definitions

Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE): An evaluation conducted by a qualified examiner who is not employed by the LEA responsible for the education of the child in question [34 C.F.R. 300.502].

Qualified Examiner: An examiner who is competent to perform the evaluations through criteria established within the Desert/Mountain SELPA Policy and Procedure Manual and in accordance with [E.C. 56322].

Unilateral Parent Initiated Evaluation: An evaluation obtained by the parent at private expense without prior approval of the LEA.

Public Expense: The LEA pays for the cost of the evaluation or ensures the evaluation is otherwise provided at no cost to the parent.

Section A - Introduction/Consideration of IEEsAn independent educational evaluation is designed to assist in determining the educational needs of a student with a disability including diagnosis, program decisions, and educational services. The Individualized Education Program (IEP) team is responsible for determining placements and services; therefore, the IEP team will consider recommendations designed to assist the student in making educational progress in accordance with this policy. IEEs will be considered in any decisions with respect to providing a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the student.

An independentprivate educational evaluation that is initiated by the parent shall be considered in any decision made with respect to the provisions of FAPE to the student. A private evaluaton obtained by the parent is different from an IEE. An IEE may be presented as evidence at a due process hearing regarding the student. All requirements outlined in the criteria for IEEs must be followed.


Federal regulations require that whenever an IEE is at public expense, the criteria under which the evaluation is obtained, including the location of the evaluation and the qualifications of the evaluator, must be the same as the criteria that the public agency uses when performing a similar evaluation [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)].

Section B - Procedures for Parents Requesting an IEE at Public ExpenseA parent has the right to obtain an IEE at public expense when the parent disagrees with the assessment obtained by the LEA [34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)]. The LEA may initiate a due process hearing to show that its evaluation is appropriate [34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)(2)(i)]. If the LEA initiates a hearing and the final decision is that the LEA’s assessment is appropriate, the parent has the right to an IEE, but not at public expense [34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)(3)].

The LEA is not responsible for providing or reimbursing an evaluation when parents merely feel the need for additional information about their child, and which is not based on a disagreement with LEA assessment results or IEP team findings. Further, when multiple IEE reports are obtained by the parents in the same assessment areas, the LEA will not reimburse the cost of more than one (1) IEE in any one area assessed when the parent disagrees with an assessment previously conducted by the LEA [34 C.F.R.300.502].

Upon request for an IEE, the LEA will provide information to the parents regarding where an appropriate IEE may be obtained [34 C.F.R. 300.502(a)(2)].

The independent examiner must meet LEA/SELPA qualifications to be at public expense [34 C.F.R.300.502(e)].

Steps to be followed by Parents Requesting an IEE at Public Expense:

1. Contact the LEA’s Director of Special Education for assistance in requesting an IEE. The parents may be asked the reasons why they object to the LEA’s evaluation, however, there is no requirement that the parents specify areas of disagreement with the LEA’s evaluation as a prior condition for obtaining an IEE.

2. The LEA’s Director of Special Education will provide a Prior Written Notice letter to the parent stating whether the LEA is accepting or denying the IEE. If the IEE is denied, the LEA will file for due process to determine the appropriateness of its assessment.

3. Upon receipt of the IEE requestIf the IEE request is accepted, the LEA will provide the parents with a copy of the Notice to Parents Regarding Independent Educational Evaluation (Appendix A) and a non-exclusive list of qualified examiners (Appendix B). If a specific independent examiner is desired by the parents, the name and resume of the examiner must be provided so that the LEA may:

a) verify the qualifications, certifications and/or license of the examiner;b) apply the location criteria; andc) initiate and negotiate a contract with the examiner

Formatted: Font: 11 pt

Formatted: List Paragraph, Numbered + Level:1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, … + Start at: 1 +Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indentat: 0.5"


Section C - Criteria for Obtaining an IEE at Public ExpenseThe IEE must be administered by the independent examiner in the same type of location and/or setting as that used by the LEA in providing similar evaluations [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)]. If the LEA evaluation included classroom observations, the independent examiner will be given access to the classroom [E.C.56327].

1. The IEE must be provided by an examiner who holds equivalent certifications, licenses, or other qualifications that would be required of the LEA staff providing similar evaluations [34 C.F.R.300.502(e) and E.C. 56322]. All assessments must be conducted in accordance with all requirements of federal and state law including, but not limited to, observing the student in the appropriate setting [E.C. 56327], and conducting evaluations in accordance with E.C. 56320. Independent examiners must meet the credentialing criteria listed below. All assessments, including all tests and subtests must be conducted by persons competent to perform the assessment as determined by the LEA [E.C.56322].

Type of Assessment Proposed Estimate

Qualifications

Academic Achievement $1,000 Credentialed Special Education TeacherCredentialed School PsychologistLicensed Clinical PsychologistLicensed Educational Psychologist

Adaptive Behavior $400 Credentialed Special Education TeacherCredentialed School PsychologistLicensed Clinical PsychologistLicensed Educational Psychologist

Auditory Acuity $280 Licensed or Credentialed AudiologistCredentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language Pathologist

Auditory Perception $300 Credentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language PathologistCredentialed School PsychologistLicensed Educational Psychologist

Assistive Technology $550 Credentialed Special Education TeacherCredentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language PathologistCredentialed Assistive Technology Specialist

Cognitive $650 Credentialed School PsychologistLicensed Clinical PsychologistLicensed Educational Psychologist

Health $300 Licensed PhysicianCredentialed School Nurse – trained and prepared to access cultural and ethnic factors appropriate to the student.

Independent Multi-disciplinary Evaluation $4,000 See individual evaluator qualifications

Neuro-Psychological Evaluation $5,000 See individual evaluator qualifications

Motor (Fine or Gross) $700 Licensed Physical TherapistLicensed Occupational TherapistCredentialed Adaptive Physical Education SpecialistCredentialed Teacher of the Physically Impaired

Neuro-Psychological $4,500

Speech and Language $800 Credentialed Licensed Speech/Language Pathologist


Social / Emotional / Behavioral (FAA/Behavior Intervention Plan)

$2,000 Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)Credentialed School PsychologistLicensed Clinical PsychologistLicensed Educational PsychologistLicensed Clinical Social WorkerLicensed Marriage and Family TherapistLicensed Psychiatrist

Speech and Language $800 Credentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language Pathologist

Vision (Functional) $300 Credentialed Teacher of the Visually Impaired

Visual Acuity / Developmental Vision $300 Licensed OphthalmologistOptometrist

Visual Motor Integration $300 Credentialed School PsychologistLicensed Educational PsychologistLicensed Occupational Therapist

Visual Perception $250 Credentialed School PsychologistLicensed Educational PsychologistCredentialed Special Education Teacher

It is recommended that when selecting an independent examiner not on the non-exclusive list of qualified examiners (Appendix B), the LEA request a copy of the examiner’s resume, two references by school districts, and itemized costs for the evaluation including writing the report and attending the IEP meeting. Prior to making the final selection of an examiner, the LEA should review the resume to ensure proper licensure/credential certification and contact the references provided.

2. The independent examiner must be located within an 85 mile radius of the Desert/Mountain SELPA office or a 40 mile radius of the LEA responsible for the IEE. Examiners outside of this area may be approved by the LEA if the parents can demonstrate the necessity of using an examiner outside of the geographical determined location. Unless an out of area evaluation is required for the student to receive an IEE, costs beyond the evaluation (i.e., transportation, lodging, food, etc.) are not covered in the contract or reimbursement to the parent/guardian.

3. Independent examiners must comply with all state and federal requirements [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)].

4. The independent examiner must provide the LEA and parent with a copy of the report prior to the IEP team meeting. The report should include:

examiner’s name, title, license, certification numberoriginal signature of the examineroriginal assessment protocols (attached to the report) - see Appendix D for information on protocols

A public agency may not impose conditions or timelines related to obtaining an IEE at public expense [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)].

Section D - Criteria for Determination of IEE FeeThe LEA will pay a fee that is routine and reasonable for the IEE, similar to those performed by qualified professionals in the local geographical area. Routine and reasonable fee is based on an average of a


random sampling of fees charged by professionals providing service in the LEA/SELPA’s area. The LEA shall make arrangements for the independent examiner to ensure that the IEE is completed in a timely manner at LEA expense.

An excessive fee is defined as one that is more than 25% higher than the routine and reasonable rate as defined in the cost guidelines in Appendix C. Parents will be allowed the opportunity to demonstrate to the LEA that unique circumstances justify IEE fees that do not fall within the criteria described in Appendix C.

Cost Guidelines:

When the LEA is negotiating the fee for an independent evaluation to be conducted at public expense, the following should be included in the fees:

cost to conduct the assessmentmileagedeveloping a written report and providing copies to the parent and LEAattending the IEP team meeting

The independent examiner must agree to release their written report, test protocols (see OSEP Policy Letter - Appendix D), assessment information, and results to the LEA prior to receipt of payment for services and at least five (5) days prior to the IEP meeting. The results from the IEE will be considered in the diagnosis, program decisions, and educational services to the student with disabilities as required by IDEA 2004. IEEs will be considered in any decisions made with respect to offers of FAPE made by the IEP team.

Section E - Circumstances Resulting in Evaluation Not Funded at LEA ExpenseThe LEA does not have an obligation to reimburse parents for private evaluations obtained prior to the date that the LEA’s evaluation is completed and discussed in an IEP meeting.

Parent request for reimbursement for private evaluation may be allowable if:

a. The LEA’s evaluation has not been provided in compliance with federal and state laws.b. The privately obtained evaluation appropriately assessed the student in an area(s) of suspected

disability, which was not assessed appropriately by the LEA.

Any reimbursement will be in accordance with LEA procedures, cost guidelines outlined in Appendix C, and in an amount no greater than the actual cost to the parent. Reimbursement does not include observations/consultation with outside consultants.

If an IEE is requested as a result of a settlement agreement in a due process hearing, the Desert/Mountain SELPA will cover the costs incurred for the IEE as outlined in the settlement agreement.

If the LEA initiates a hearing and the final decision is that the evaluation is appropriate, the parent still has the right to obtain an IEE at their own expense. If the LEA initiates a due process hearing and the


final decision is that the LEA’s evaluation is appropriate, no reimbursement shall be made unless ordered by a Hearing Officer [34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)(3)]


APPENDIX A

Notice to Parents Regarding Independent Educational Evaluations (IEE)

Please read the information below before obtaining an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE). Before obtaining an IEE, contact the Director of Special Education within your local education agency (school district) to discuss your assessment questions. An IEE obtained on a unilateral basis will not automatically be reimbursed. All requests for an IEE will be processed in accordance with the policy, procedures, and criteria set forth herein.

DEFINITIONS

INDEPENDENT EVALUATION (IEE): An evaluation conducted by a qualified examiner who is not employed by the local education agency (LEA) responsible for the education of the child in question [34 C.F.R. 300.502].

QUALIFIED EXAMINER: An examiner who is competent to perform the evaluations through criteria established within the Desert/MountainSELPA Policy and Procedure Manual and in accordance with [E.C. 56322].

PUBLIC EXPENSE: The LEA pays for the cost of the evaluation or ensures the evaluation is otherwise provided at no cost to the parent.

CONSIDERATION OF INDEPENDENT EDUCATIONAL EVALUATIONS

An independent educational evaluation is designed to assist in determining the educational needs of a student with a disability including diagnosis, program decisions, and educational services. The IEP team is responsible for determining placements and services; therefore, the IEP team will consider recommendations designed to assist the student in making educational progress in accordance with this policy. IEEs will be considered in any decision made with respect to providing a free appropriate public education program (FAPE) for the student.

An independent private educational evaluation that is initiated by the parent shall be considered in any decision made with respect to the provisions of FAPE to the student. A private evaluation obtained by the parent is different from an IEE. An IEE may be presented as evidence at a due process hearing regarding the student. All requirements outlined in the criteria for IEEs must be followed.

Federal regulations require that whenever an IEE is at public expense, the criteria under which the evaluation is obtained, including the location of the evaluation and the qualifications of the examiner, must be the same as the criteria that the public agency uses when performing a similar evaluation [34 C.F.R. 300.502(a)].

PROCEDURES FOR PARENTS REQUESTING AN INDEPENDENT EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AT PUBLIC EXPENSE

If a parent disagrees with an evaluation completed by a local education agency (LEA) and seeks an independent educational evaluation, the LEA shall either initiate a due process hearing to obtain a


APPENDIX A

determination that its evaluation is appropriate or will provide the parent with an opportunity to obtain an IEE within this policy [34 C.F.R. 300.502(b); 34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)(2)(i)].

The parent should contact the LEA’s Director of Special Education for assistance in seeking an IEE.

The parents may be asked the reason that they object to the LEA’s evaluation; however, there is no requirement that the parents specify areas of disagreement with the LEA’s evaluation as a prior condition for obtaining the IEE.

Upon request for an IEE at LEA expenseIf the IEE request is accepted, the LEA shall provide the parents with the policy, procedures, and criteria for an IEE (Appendix A) [34 C.F.R. 300.502(a)(2)]. The LEAshall offer the parent a non-exclusive list of public agencies and private individuals whom the LEA has determined are “qualified” in their respective areas of assessment (Appendix B). The LEA does not specifically endorse any listed agency or individual. Other agencies and individuals may be considered if they meet the IEE qualified provider criteria. Cost guidelines are available for consideration (Appendix C). If a specific independent examiner is desired by the parents, the name and resume of the examiner must be provided so that the LEA may:

a) verify the qualifications, certifications and/or licensure of the examiner;b) apply the location criteria; andc) initiate and negotiate a contract with the examiner

The LEA’s Director of Special Education will provide Prior Written Notice to the parent/guardian stating whether the LEA is accepting or denying the IEE. If the IEE is denied, the LEA will file for due processto determine the appropriateness of its assessment.

The LEA shall make arrangements for the independent examiner to ensure that the IEE is completed in a timely manner at LEA expense.

If the LEA initiates a hearing and the final decision is that the evaluation is appropriate, the parent still has the right to retain another individual to conduct an evaluation, but not at LEA expense [34 C.F.R.300.502(b)(3)]. If the LEA initiates a due process hearing and the final decision is that the LEA’s evaluation is appropriate, no reimbursement shall be made unless ordered by a Hearing Officer.

All independent examiners are required to provide a written report and copies of the test protocols (Appendix D) to the LEA prior to the IEP meeting to review the IEE. The results of the IEE will be considered in making educational decisions required by the IDEA 2004. The independent examiner will be required to participate in the IEP meeting by telephone or in person, at which time the IEE is being discussed. The cost of the independent examiner’s participation in the IEP meeting will be included as part of the cost of conducting the IEE.


Parent requests IEE after disagreeing with an assessment by the district [34 CFR § 300.502(b)]

Parent contacts district Director of Special Education to request an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE)

Director of Special Education will provide Prior Written Notice to parent/guardian stating whether the district will accept or deny the IEE request

DENIEDDistrict files for Due Process to show that its evaluation is appropriate [34 CFR § 300.502(b)(2)(i)]

ACCEPTEDDirector of Special Education provides:

1. COPY OF NOTICE TO PARENTS REGARDING IEE – APPENDIX A

2. NON-EXCLUSIVE LIST OF QUALIFIED EXAMINERS –APPENDIX B

3 COST GUIDELINES –

OAH determines the district assessment IS appropriate

OAH determines district assessment is NOT appropriate

Parent may obtain an IEE, but NOT at public expense [34 CFR § 300.502(b)(3)]

Director of Special Education initiates and negotiates a contract with Independent Examiner [EC § 56322]

If specific examiner is specified by parent, the name and resume of the examiner must be provided to thedistrict to apply qualification and location criteria [34

IEE completed by examiner [34 CFR § 300.502(e), EC § 56327]

Written report, test protocols, results sent to Director of Special Education prior to IEP team meeting

IEP meeting held to discuss IEE information. Independent Examiner participates in person or by telephone


APPENDIX A

CRITERIA FOR OBTAINING AN IEE AT PUBLIC EXPENSE

1. Local Limitations for Independent Examiners

The independent examiner must be located within an 85 mile radius of the Desert/Mountain SELPA office or within a 40 mile radius of the LEA responsible for the IEE.

2. Minimum Qualifications for Independent Examiners

All assessments must be conducted in accordance with all requirements of federal and state laws including, but not limited to, observing the student in the appropriate setting [E.C. 56327] and conducting evaluations in accordance with E.C. 56320. Examiners must meet the credentialing/licensing criteria listed below. All assessments must be conducted by individuals certified as competent as determined by the LEA [E.C.56322].

The IEE must be administered by the examiner in the same type of location and/or setting as that used by the LEA in providing similar evaluations [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)]. If the LEA evaluation included classroom observations, the independent examiner will be given access to the classroom [E.C.56327].


Qualifications





Assistive Technology $550 Credentialed Special Education TeacherCredentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language PathologistCredentialed Assistive Technology Specialist


Health $300 Licensed PhysicianCredentialed School Nurse – trained and prepared to access cultural and ethnic factors appropriate to the student.


Neuro-Psychological Evaluation $5,000 See individual evaluator qualifications

Motor (Fine or Gross) $700 Licensed Physical TherapistLicensed Occupational TherapistCredentialed Adaptive Physical Education Specialist


APPENDIX A

Credentialed Teacher of the Physically Impaired


Speech and Language $800 Credentialed Licensed Speech/Language Pathologist








For a neuro-psychological evaluation, the specialist must possess an educational psychologist license or credential and appropriate education, training and experience in the administration and interpretation of neuro-psychological assessment tools.

3. Independent examiners must comply with all state and federal requirements [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)].

4. Provision and/or Release of Independent Examiner’s Written Report

Independent educational examiners must agree to release their written report, test protocols (Appendix D), assessment information and results to the LEA prior to receipt of payment for services.The report should include:

examiner’s name, title, license, certification numberoriginal signature of the examineroriginal assessment protocols (attached to the report) - see Appendix D for information on test protocols

All independent educational examiners are required to provide a written report and copies of the test protocols prior to the IEP team meeting. The results from the IEE will be considered in the diagnosis, program decisions, and educational services to the student with disabilities as required by the IDEA 2004 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

5. A public agency may not impose conditions or timelines related to obtaining an IEE at public expense [34 C.F.R. 300.502(e)].

Formatted: Justified


APPENDIX A

CRITERIA FOR DETERMINATION OF IEE FEES

The LEA will pay a fee that is routine and reasonable for the IEE, similar to those performed by qualified professionals in the local geographical area. Routine and reasonable fee is based on an average of a random sampling of fees charged by professionals providing service in the LEA/SELPA’s area. The LEAshall make arrangements for the independent examiner to ensure that the IEE is completed in a timely manner at LEA expense.

An excessive fee is defined as one that is more than 25% higher than the routine and reasonable rate as defined in the cost guidelines in Appendix C. Parents will be allowed the opportunity to demonstrate to the LEA that unique circumstances justify IEE fees that do not fall within the criteria described in Appendix C.

Cost Guidelines:

When the LEA is negotiating the fee for an independent evaluation to be conducted at public expense, the following should be included in the fees:

cost to conduct the assessmentmileagedeveloping a written report and providing copies to the parent and LEAattending the IEP team meeting

The independent educational examiner must agree to release their written report, test protocols (see OSEP Policy Letter - Appendix D), assessment information, and results to the LEA prior to receipt of payment for services and at least five (5) days prior to the IEP meeting. The results from the IEE will be considered in the diagnosis, program decisions, and educational services to the student with disabilities as required by IDEA 2004. IEEs will be considered in any decisions made with respect to offers of FAPE made by the IEP team.

CIRCUMSTANCES RESULTING IN EVALUATIONS NOT FUNDED AT DISTRICT EXPENSE

The LEA does not have an obligation to reimburse parents for private evaluations obtained prior to the date that the LEA’s evaluation is completed and discussed in an IEP meeting.

Parent request for reimbursement for private evaluation may be allowable if:

a) The LEA’s evaluation has not been provided in compliance with federal and state laws.b) The privately obtained evaluation appropriately assessed the student in an area(s) of suspected

disability, which was not assessed appropriately by the LEA.

Reimbursement will be in accordance with LEA procedures, cost guidelines outlined in Appendix C, and in an amount no greater than the actual cost to the parent. Reimbursement does not include observations/consultation with outside consultants.

If an IEE is requested as the result of a settlement agreement in a due process hearing, the


APPENDIX A

Desert/Mountain SELPA will cover the costs incurred for the IEE as outlined in the settlement agreement.

If the LEA initiates a hearing and the final decision is that the evaluation is appropriate, the parent still has the right to obtain an IEE at their own expense. If the LEA initiates a due process hearing and the final decision is that the LEA’s evaluation is appropriate, no reimbursement shall be made unless ordered by a Hearing Officer, 34 C.F.R. 300.502(b)(3).


APPENDIX B

Sources of Independent Evaluation by the Area of Assessment (updated 7/2015)

The following is a non-exclusive list of public agencies and private individuals whom the LEA has determined are qualified in their respective areas of assessment. The LEA does not specifically endorse any listed agencies or individuals. Other agencies and individuals will be considered if they meet LEAcriteria. All private individuals who qualify under criteria established by the LEA are encouraged to apply. The fee schedule will be updated periodically to ensure parents the opportunity to choose from qualified assessors in the area.

SPEECH AND LANGUAGEArdor Health Solutions, Inc.9830 Coral Ridge Dr., S 120 • Coral Springs, FL 33076(866) 425-5768 • (888) 308-1147Website: www.ardorhealth.com

Augmentative Communication Therapies Cindy Cottier960 E. Green St., #203 • Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 351-5402

Caring Communication Speech & Language Services8560 Vineyard Ave., Suite 410 • Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730(909) 945-2700 • (888) 876-2701 FAX

Casa Colina Children’s Services Center255 East Bonita Ave. • P.O. Box 6001 • Pomona, CA 91769(909) 596-7733, ext. 4200 • (909) 596-3548 FAXWebsite: http://www.casacolina.org/

Community Speech Center of Upland4959 Palo Verde St., Suite 101-C • Montclair, CA 91763(909) 908 1771 • (877) 284-8923 FAX

Denise Parks, MA, CCC-SLP22707 San Joaquin Dr. • East Canyon Lake, CA 92587(951) 347-0155

High Desert Speech & LanguageLakieta L. Emanuel, M.A., CCC-SLP/CEO/Lead Therapist16785 Bear Valley Rd., Suite 2 • Hesperia, CA 92345(760) 782-8884 • (866) 490-0434 FAXWebsite: www.highdesertspeech.com

Progressus Therapy, LLC2701 N. Rocky Point Dr., Suite 650 • Tampa, FL 33607(813) 549-5821 • (800) 892-0640 • (800) 892-0648 FAXWebsite: www.progressustherapy.com

Sound TherapiesRachel Zijlstra3551 Redwood Street • San Diego, CA 92104(619) 641-7744 • (866) 547-8918Website: www.soundtherapiesinc.com

Specialized Therapy ServicesSteven Oas3555 Kenyon St., #101 • San Diego, CA 92110Main Clinic 4204-A Adams Ave. • San Diego, CA 92116(619) 252-4557 • (619) 226-2411Website: https://www.theoascenter.com

AUTISM / BEHAVIORApplied Behavior Consultants, Inc. (ABC)800 Ferrari Lane, Suite 100 • Ontario, CA 91764(909) 484-2848, ext. 15 • (909) 484-3505 FAXWebsite: www.appliedbehaviorconsultants.com

Autism Behavioral Consultants1880 Town and Country Rd., Suite B-101 • Norco, CA 92860(951) 737-6300 • (951) 737-8779 FAXWebsite: www.autismbehaviorconsultants.net

Autism Spectrum Therapies, Inc.147 E. Olive Ave. • Monrovia, CA 91016(626) 446-1101, ext. 125 • (626) 930-0792 FAX1918 Business Center Dr., Suite 115 • San Bernardino,CA 92408Website: www.autismtherapies.com

Behavioral and Education Support Team (BEST)411 S. Magnolia Ave. • El Cajon, CA 92020(619) 442-1271 • (619) 444-8182 FAXWebsite: www.bestautismservices.com

LeafWing Center15972 Tuscola Rd., Ste 102 • Apple Valley, CA 92307(760) 242-3353 • [email protected]: www.leafwingcenter.org

Center for Autism & Related Disorders (CARD)7145 Magnolia Ave. • Riverside, CA 92504(951) 686-2020 • (951) 686-2120 FAXWebsite: www.centerforautism.com


APPENDIX B

AUTISM / BEHAVIOR (CONTINUED)Comprehensive Autism Services & Education, Inc.785 Grand Ave., Suite 101 • Carlsbad, CA 92008(760) 720-4964 • (760) 720-5264 FAXWebsite: www.casefamily.com

Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC)17800 Highway 18 • Apple Valley, CA 92307(760) 552-6700 • (760) 242-5363 FAXWebsite: www.dmselpa.org

People’s Care Autism Services13901 Amargosa Rd., Sutie 202 • Victorville, CA 92392(760) 512-1925Website: www.peoplescareautism.com

Specialized Therapy ServicesSteven Oas3555 Kenyon St., #101 • San Diego, CA 92110Main Clinic 4204-A Adams Ave. • San Diego, CA 92116(619) 252-4557 • (619) 226-2411Website: https://www.theoascenter.com

VISION ASSESSMENTFrancine M. Horibe, O.D.364 E. Rowland Avenue • Covina, CA 91723592 S Grand Ave. • Covina, CA 91724(626) 331-6448

Elizabeth Ann Simpson, O.D.1131 W. 6th Street, Suite 150 • Ontario, CA 91762(909) 986-0918

Ami Patel, O.D.2271 S. Diamond Bar Blvd. • Diamond Bar, CA 91765(909) 598-4393

William Bescoby, O.D., F.C.O.V.D.8790 19th Street, #357 • Alta Loma, CA 91701(951) 205-2286

Southern California College of OptometryEye Care Center at Fullerton2575 Yorba Linda Blvd. • Fullerton, CA 92831(714) 992-7816 • (714) 992-7811 FAXWebsite: http://sccoeyecare.com/index.php

OCCUPATIONAL / PHYSICAL THERAPISTArdor Health Solutions, Inc.9830 Coral Ridge Dr., S 120 • Coral Springs, FL 33076(866) 425-5768 • (888) 308-1147Website: www.ardorhealth.com

Casa Colina Children’s Services Center255 East Bonita Ave. • P.O. Box 6001 • Pomona, CA 91769(909) 596-7733, ext. 4200 • (909) 596-3548 FAXWebsite: http://www.casacolina.org/


Horizon Therapy Services8268 White Oak Ave. • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730(909) 373-1641 • (909) 481-7657 or 0444 FAXWebsite: www.horizontherapyservices.com

Mediscan Therapy Services21050 Califa Street • Woodland Hills, CA 91367(818) 462-0000 • (818) 401-2125 • 758-4220 FAXWebsite: http://www.mediscan.net

Progressus Therapy, LLC2701 N. Rocky Point Dr., Suite 650 • Tampa, FL 33607(813) 549-5821 • (800) 892-0640 • (800) 892-0648 FAXWebsite: www.progressustherapy.com

PSYCHOLOGISTSJames M. Hite14163 Ashton Lane • Riverside, CA 92508(951) 318-3129

Richard J. Kleindienst, Ph.D.2823 Nevada Way • Riverside, CA 92506(951) 660-8394

Dr. Dudley WiestCal State University, San Bernardino5500 University Parkway • San Bernardino, CA 92407(909) 537-5628

Doran A. Dula, Psy.D.250 West First St., Suite 352 • Claremont, CA 91711(909) 624-TEST • (909) 626-4507


APPENDIX B

PSYCHOLOGISTS (CONTINUED)Paul Rosell, M.S., C.C.B.T.Licensed Educational Psychologist, #208419167 Highway 18, Suite 2 • Apple Valley, CA 92307(760) 900-0289

Federico Parres, Ph.D.Alta Loma, CA(909) 241-8582

Rebecca L. ParresAlta Loma, CA(909) 938-2477

Cathleen A. Geraghty, Ph.D.University of California, Riverside(951) 827-2051 • (909) 709-9861 • (951) 308-1671 FAXWebsite: www.cathleengeraghty.com

Wendy Ness14808 Choke Cherry Dr. • Victorville, CA 92392(760) 900-6845

Veronica Escoffery-Runnels, Ed.D.7353 Ellena West, Unit #150 • Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730(909) 593-3511, ext. 4812

Lisa R. Grijalva10459 Farmington St. • Oak Hills, CA 92344(760) 244-2283, ext. 4793Email: [email protected]

Bickford & Covington Psychotherapy Services511 Brookside Avenue • Redlands, CA 92373(909) 794-8400 • (909) 335-8514 FAXWebsite: http://bickfordcovington.com


Brent M. Cooper3400 Central Ave., Suite 310 • Riverside, CA 92506(760) 342-4900 • (760) 342-0499 FAXWebsite: www.elpaseotesting.com

Madison M. Kendrick, LMFTLicensed Educational Pyschologist, #3031P.O. Box 2888 • Wrightwood, CA 92397(760) 912-5780

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGYPeter ClarksonP.O. Box 26504 • Santa Clarita, CA 91350 Bouquet Road #142 • Santa Clarita, CA 91350

Augmentative Communication Therapies Cindy Cottier960 E. Green St., #203 • Pasadena, CA 91106(626) 351-5402

Barbara J. KoubaP.O. Box 1106 • Helendale, CA 92342(760) 784-5059

Kathleen M. PhillipsP.O. Box 3385 • Wrightwood, CA 92397(760) 680-9497

Assistive Technology Assessment CenterLarry Silcock24858 Prospect St. • Loma Linda, CA 92354(909) 796-7311, ext. 47532

Orange County Goodwill-ATEC410 N. Fairview • Santa Ana, CA 92703(714) 547-6308 • (714) 361-6220 FAXWebsite: www.ocgoodwill.org


APPENDIX C

Suggested Cost Guidelines for Assessments

Costs listed below are suggested guidelines for a LEA to consider in contracting with an independent educational examiner. The routine and reasonable fees listed below are based on an average of a random sampling of fees charged by professionals providing services in the LEA/SELPA’s area.

Cost exceeding the suggested amounts may be approved by the LEA if the parent is able to demonstrate unique circumstances which justify going outside of the LEA’s fee parameters.


Qualifications





Assistive Technology $550 Credentialed Special Education TeacherCredentialed Speech and Language PathologistLicensed Speech and Language PathologistCredentialed Assistive Technology specialist


Health $300 Licensed PhysicianCredentialed School Nurse – trained and prepared to access cultural and ethnic factors appropriate to the student


Neuro-Psychological $5,000 See individual evaluator qualifications

Motor (Fine or Gross) $700 Licensed Physical TherapistLicensed Occupational TherapistCredentialed Adaptive Physical Education SpecialistCredentialed Teacher of the Physically Impaired


Speech and Language $800 Credentialed Licensed Speech and Language Pathologist



Formatted Table


APPENDIX C






For a neuro-psychological evaluation, the specialist must possess an educational psychologist license or credential and appropriate education, training and experience in the administration and interpretation of neuro-psychological assessment tools.


APPENDIX D

11 FAB 30 108 LRP 2302

Letter to ShusterOffice of Special Education Programs

N/AAugust 7, 2007

Case Summary

A parent of a student with disabilities expressed dissatisfaction over his inability to access his son's test protocols. OSEP noted that under certain circumstances, a protocol would not be considered a part of a student's education records and, as such, there would be no right to automatic access by a parent. For example, a protocol is not considered an education record of the student if it is separate from the sheet on which the student records his or her answers to the test and if it does not contain any personally identifiable information about the student. However, OSEP also noted that both the IDEA and FERPA require districts to respond to reasonable requests for explanations and interpretations of education records. Accordingly, if the district maintained a copy of a student's test answer sheet (an "education record"), the parent would have a right to request an explanation and interpretation of the record. The explanation and interpretation by the school could entail showing the parent the test question booklet (i.e., the protocol), reading the questions to the parent, or providing an interpretation for the response in some other adequate manner that would inform the parent. OSEP also noted that federal copyright law protects against the distribution of copies of copyrighted document, such as a test protocols. But it said that since the IDEA and FERPA "generally do not require the distribution of copies of an education record, but rather parental access to inspect and review, federal copyright law generally should not be implicated under these regulations." OSEP did not address the implications of copyright law to the circumstances when parents are entitled to copies because it is impossible or impracticable for them to inspect the records in person.

Judge / Administrative Officer

Patricia J. Guard, Acting Director

Full Text

Honorable Bill Shuster

U.S. Representative

Ninth District of Pennsylvania

647 Philadelphia Street, Suite 304

Indiana, PA 15701

Dear Congressman Shuster:

Thank you for your letter of June 9, 2007 to Dr. Alexa Posny, then Director of the Office of Special Education Programs with the U.S. Department of Education, on behalf of your constituent [ ]. In the letter to Dr. Posny, you indicated that your office received a June 4, 2007 letter from [ ] in which he expressed dissatisfaction with the issues and records being released for his son in accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). You used your letter as an opportunity to follow up with Dr. Posny about the status of his case, and requested information be offered in a letter that would be helpful to you in responding to your constituent.

As stated in an April 12, 2007 letter to your from Dr. Posny, in an effort to resolve this matter, Hugh Reid, then theOffice of Special Education Programs (OSEP) contact to Pennsylvania contacted [ ] on April 10, 2007 seeking, and receiving, permission to speak with the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) Bureau of Special Education


APPENDIX D

(BSE). Mr. Reid contacted BSE and spoke with Mr. Thomas Reich, Acting Chief, Division of Compliance, Monitoring and Planning for Western Pennsylvania. Mr. Reich indicated that he would contact [ ] directly, specifically to: (1) assist [ ] with the resolution of his issues with PDE: (2) if necessary, assist [ ] with filing a complaint under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) as specified in 34 CFR §§ 300.151 through 300.153; and (3) provide oversight of the process on behalf of Mr. John Tommasini, Director of Special Education, PDE.

Since [ ] continues to express dissatisfaction with PDE and the U.S. Department of Education's efforts to resolve his concerns, it might be helpful in this correspondence to explain how the IDEA regulations define "education records" and access to those records. 34 CFR § 300.611(b) defines education records as the type of records covered by FERPA as implemented by regulations in 34 CFR part 99. Under § 99.3 (of the FERPA regulations), the term "education records" is broadly defined to mean those records that directly relate to a student that are maintained by an educational agency or institution. (FERPA applies to all educational agencies and institutions to which funds have been made available under any program administered by the Secretary of Education. 34 CFR § 99.1.

Parents of children with disabilities have access rights to education records under 34 CFR § 300.613. This provision requires that, "Each participating agency must permit parents to inspect and review any educational records relating to their children that are collected, maintained, or used by the agency under this part." The provision does not necessarily require the agency to provide copies of the records unless the "failure to provide those copies would effectively prevent the parent from exercising the right to inspect and review the records." 34 CFR § 300.613(b)(2).

Since [ ] request for his son's education records includes a request for test protocols, we are providing to you our long-standing policy regarding test protocols as education records and our policy regarding providing copies of copyrighted materials (such as test protocols) to parents. This policy is contained in the Analysis of Comments and Changes section of the 1999 IDEA regulations. Our policy remains the same. The discussion from the 1999 regulations regarding those issues states:

Records that are not directly related to a student and maintained by an agency or institution are not "education records" under FERPA and parents do not have a right to inspect and review such records. For example, a test protocol or question booklet which is separate from the sheet on which a student records answers and which is not personally identifiable to the student would not be a part of his or her "education records." However, Part B and FERPA provide that an educational agency or institution shall respond to reasonable requests for explanations and interpretations of education records. (34 CFR § 300.562(b)(1); 34 CFR § 99.10(c)). Accordingly, if a school were to maintain a copy of a student's test answer sheet (an "education record"), the parent would have a right under Part B and FERPA to request an explanation and interpretation of the record. The explanation and interpretation by the school could entail showing the parent the test question booklet, reading the questions to the parent, or providing an interpretation for the response in some other adequate manner that would inform the parent.

...

With respect to the issue of liability for disclosing information to parents when other laws or contractual obligations would prohibit it, public agencies are required to comply with the provisions of IDEA and FERPA, and must ensure that State law and other contractual obligations do not interfere with compliance with IDEA and FERPA. Federal copyright law protects against the distribution of copies of copyrighted document, such as a test protocol. Since IDEA and FERPA generally do not require the distribution of copies of an education record, but rather parental access to inspect and review, Federal copyright law generally should not be implicated under these regulations.

There is nothing in the legislative history of section 615(b)(1) of the Act to suggest that it expanded the scope of information available to parent examination beyond those records that they would have access to under FERPA. 64 Fed. Reg. 12605, 12641 (March 12, 1999).

If, after reviewing this information, [ ] continues to believe that PDE has denied his right to access his son's education records, he may file a State complaint under 34 CFR § 300.153.


APPENDIX D

Based on section 607(e) of the IDEA, we are informing you that our response is provided as informal guidance and is not legally binding, but represents an interpretation by the U.S. Department of Education of the IDEA in the context of the specific facts presented.

Copyright 2010 © LRP Publications

D/M

83

Rev

. 09/

14Pa

ge 1

of 1

DE

SER

T/M

OU

NTA

IN S

PEC

IAL

EDU

CA

TIO

N L

OC

AL

PLA

N A

REA

DE

SER

T/M

OU

NTA

IN C

HA

RT

ER S

PEC

IAL

ED

UC

ATI

ON

LO

CA

L PL

AN

AR

EA17

800

HIG

HW

AY

18

• APP

LE V

ALL

EY, C

A 9

2307

(760

) 552

-670

0 • (

760)

242

-536

3 FA

X

Ass

istiv

e T

echn

olog

y A

sses

smen

t and

Inde

pend

ent E

duca

tiona

l Eva

luat

ion

Rei

mbu

rsem

ent R

eque

st F

orm

DIS

TR

ICT

USE

ON

LY

DIR

EC

TIO

NS:

CO

MPL

ET

E T

HE

AT

A A

ND

IEE

RE

IMB

UR

SEM

EN

T R

EQU

EST

FO

RM

AN

D S

UB

MIT

TH

E F

OR

M T

O T

HE

DE

SER

T/M

OU

NT

AIN

SE

LPA

FO

R A

PPR

OV

AL

.D

istri

ct:

Fisc

al o

r Sch

ool Y

ear:

Prep

ared

By:

Title

/Pos

ition

:C

onta

ct P

hone

:

I H

ER

EB

Y C

ER

TIF

Y T

HA

T T

HE

EX

PEN

DIT

UR

E R

EPO

RT

ED

BE

LO

W H

AV

E B

EE

N M

AD

E A

ND

TH

E F

UN

DS

HA

VE

BE

EN

EX

PEN

DE

D I

N A

CC

OR

DA

NC

E W

ITH

FE

DE

RA

L

AN

D S

TA

TE

LA

WS

AN

D R

EG

UL

AT

ION

S, A

ND

TH

AT

AL

L R

EC

OR

DS

OF

RE

CE

IPT

S A

ND

EX

PEN

DIT

UR

ES

HA

VE

BE

EN

MA

INT

AIN

ED

AN

D A

RE

AV

AIL

AB

LE

FO

R A

UD

IT.

DIS

TR

ICT

AU

DIT

OR

WIL

L P

ER

FOR

M A

LL

FIN

AN

CIA

L A

ND

CO

MPL

IAN

CE

TE

STS

REQ

UIR

ED

BY

TH

E C

IRC

UL

AR

A-1

33.

Aut

horiz

ed R

epre

sent

ativ

e N

ame:

Title

/Pos

ition

:

Aut

horiz

ed R

epre

sent

ativ

e Si

gnat

ure:

Dat

e:

ASS

ESS

ME

NT

DA

TE

STU

DE

NT

NA

ME

ASS

ESS

ING

AG

EN

CY

TY

PE O

F A

SSE

SSM

EN

TT

OT

AL

CO

STFO

R A

SSE

SSM

EN

TA

MO

UN

T T

O B

E

RE

IMB

UR

SED

DIS

TR

ICT

AC

CO

UN

T N

UM

BE

R T

O R

EC

EIV

E P

AY

ME

NT

OR

TR

AN

SFE

R T

O:

--

--

--

-

SEL

PA U

SE O

NL

YA

MO

UN

T R

EQ

UE

STE

DA

MO

UN

T A

PPR

OV

ED

SEL

PA A

ppro

val:

Dat

e:$

$SE

LPA

Adm

inis

trat

orPu

rcha

se O

rder

#:

APP

END

IX E

Sele

ct...

NOTICE OF PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Part B

This information provides parents, legal guardians, and surrogate parents of children with disabilities from 3 years of age through age 21 an overview of their educational rights, sometimes called procedural safeguards. This information is your Notice of Procedural Safeguards as required under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This notice is also provided for students who are entitled to these rights at age 18. (NOTE: The term school district is used throughout this document to describe any public education agency responsible for providing your child's special education program. The term assessment is used to mean evaluation.)

D/M 77 Rev. 08/15 Page 1 of 3

INTRODUCTION: The IDEA is a federal law that requires school districts to provide a free, appropriate public education to eligible children with disabilities. "A free appropriate public education" means special education and related services provided as described in an individualized education program (IEP) and under public supervision, to your child at no cost to you. When you have a concern about your child's education, it is important that you call or contact your child's teacher or administrators to talk about your child and any problems you see. Staff in your school district or special education local plan area (SELPA) can answer questions about your child's education, your rights and procedural safeguards. When you have a concern, it is this informal conversation that often solves the problem and helps maintain open communication. Prior Written Notice: The school district must inform you about proposed evaluations of your child in a written notice or an assessment plan within fifteen (15) days of your written request for evaluation that is understandable and in your native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so. This notice must be given when the school district proposes or refuses to initiate a change in the identification, assessment, or educational placement of your child with special needs or the provision of a free appropriate public education. If you refuse consent for the initial or continued placement and receipt of special education and related services for your child, the district is not required to develop an IEP and is not considered to be in violation of the requirement to make available a free and appropriate public education. You may only revoke consent in writing and the district must then provide you written notice that services for your child will be discontinued. The school district must also provide reasonable written prior notice that your child will be aging out (reaching age 22) or graduating from high school with a regular high school diploma because graduation from high school constitutes a change in placement. The Prior Written Notice Must Include the Following: A description of the actions proposed or refused by the school district; an explanation of why the action is proposed or refused; a description of any other options considered and the reasons those options were rejected; a description of each assessment procedure, test, record or report used as a basis for the action proposed or refused; a description of any other factors relevant to the action proposed or refused; and a statement that you as a parent of a child with a disability are protected by the procedural safeguards. If the notice is not in regard to an initial referral for assessment, the notice must provide a statement that you have protections under procedural safeguards; information on how you can obtain a copy of described procedural safeguards; and sources of additional assistance in understanding the procedural safeguards. The Notice of Procedural Safeguards must be given to you [E.C. 56301(d)(2)]: • Upon initial referral for specia

education • Your request for an evaluation

• Once each year • The first occurrence of mediation • When you request them or a due process hearing Parent Participation: You have the right to refer your child for special education services. You must be given opportunities to participate in any decision-making meeting regarding your child's special education program. You have the right to participate in IEP meetings about the identification (eligibility), assessment, and educational placement of your child and other matters relating to your child's free appropriate public education. You also have the right to participate in the development of the IEP and to be informed of the availability of free appropriate public education including all program options and of all available alternative programs, both public and nonpublic. You have the right to record electronically the proceedings of the IEP team on an audiotape recorder. The law requires that you notify the district at least 24 hours prior to meeting if you intend to record the proceedings. Surrogate Parents: School districts must ensure that an individual is assigned to act as a surrogate parent for the parents of a child with a disability when a parent cannot be identified and the school district cannot discover the whereabouts of a parent. A surrogate parent may be appointed if the child is an unaccompanied homeless youth, adjudicated dependent or ward of the court under the state

Welfare and Institution Code and the child is referred to special education or already has an IEP. Parent Consent: You must give informed, written consent before your child's first special education assessment can proceed and before the school district can provide your child's special education program. The parent has fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the proposed assessment plan to arrive at a decision. The assessment may begin immediately upon receipt of the consent and must be completed and an IEP developed within sixty (60) days of your consent. In the case of reevaluations, the school district must document reasonable attempts to obtain parental consent. If the parents do not respond to these attempts, the school district may proceed with the reevaluation without consent. Consent to Bill California Medi-Cal & Release/Exchange Information for Health Related Special Education and Related Services: School districts may submit claims to California Medi-Cal for covered services provided to Medi-Cal eligible children enrolled in special education programs. The Medi-Cal program is a way for school districts and/or County Offices of Education (COEs) to receive federal funds to help pay for health related special education and related services. Your consent is voluntary and can be revoked at any time. If you do revoke consent, the revocation is not retroactive. Consent will not result in denial or limitation of community-based services provided outside the school. If you refuse to consent for the school district and/or COE to access California Medi-Cal to pay for health related special education and/or related services, the school district and/or COE is still responsible to ensure that all required special education and related services are provided at no cost to you. As a parent, you need to know that: • You may refuse to sign consent • Information about your family and child is strictly confidential • Your rights are protected under Title 34, Code of Federal Regulations

300.154; Family Education Rights Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA); Title 20, United States Code Section 1232(g); Title 34 Code of Federal Regulations Section 99.

• Your consent is good for one (1) year unless you withdraw your consent before that time. Your consent can be renewed annually at the IEP team meeting

Furthermore, as a public agency, the school district may access your public benefits or insurance to pay for related services required under Part B of the IDEA, for a free appropriate public education (FAPE). For related services required to provide FAPE to an eligible student, the school district: • May not require you to sign up for or enroll in public benefits or Insurance

programs (Medi-Cal) in order for your child to receive FAPE under Part B of the IDEA (34 CFR 300.154(d)(2)(i))

• May not require you to incur an out-of-pocket expense such as the payment of a deductible or co-pay amount incurred in filing a claim for services and reimbursement through Medi-Cal (34 CFR 300.154(d)(2)(ii))

• May not use your child’s benefits under Medi-Cal if that use would: Decrease available lifetime coverage or any other insured benefit. Result in the family paying for services that would otherwise be covered

by the public benefits or insurance program (Medi-Cal) and are required for your child outside of the time your child is in school.

Increase premiums or lead to the discontinuation of public benefits or insurance (Medi-Cal).

Risk loss of eligibility for home and community-based waivers, based on aggregate health related expenditures.

Parental Revocation of Consent after Consenting to Initial Provision of Services: You may only revoke your consent in writing and this action cannot be retroactive. Once you revoke consent to the initial provision of services, the district will provide prior written notice before ceasing the services. If in the future you seek re-enrollment in special education for your child, the assessment will be treated as an initial evaluation. Child Participation/Right: As part of the participation of an individual with exceptional needs in the development of an individualized education program, as required by federal law, your child has the right to meet with his/her IEP



D/M 77 Rev. 08/15 Page 2 of 3

team at any time, to provide confidential input to any representative of his/her IEP team. [CCR 56341.5(d)] Age of Majority: When your child reaches the age of 18, all rights under Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) will transfer to your child. The only exception will be if your child is determined to be incompetent under State law. Nondiscriminatory Evaluations: Evaluations are conducted prior to an initial placement, triennially, but not more frequently than once per year unless the parent and the school agree otherwise. Materials and procedures used for evaluations and placement must not be racially, culturally, or sexually discriminatory. Tests must be administered in your child's native language or mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so. No single procedure can be the sole criteria for determining an appropriate educational program for your child. Access to Educational Records and Other Rights Related to Records: You have a right to inspect and review all of your child's education records without unnecessary delay before any meeting about your child's IEP or before any due process hearing. The school district must provide you access to records and copies if requested, within 5 days after the request has been made orally or in writing. Independent Educational Evaluation: If you disagree with the results of the evaluation conducted by the school district, you have the right to ask for and obtain an independent educational evaluation for your child from a person qualified to conduct the evaluation at public expense. You are entitled to only one independent educational evaluation at public expense each time the school district conducts an evaluation with which the parent disagrees. The school district must respond to your request for an independent educational evaluation and provide you information upon request about where to obtain an independent educational evaluation. If the school district disagrees that an independent evaluation is necessary, the school district must request a due process hearing to prove that its evaluation was appropriate. If the district prevails, you still have the right to an independent evaluation but not at public expense. The IEP team must consider the results and recommendations of independent evaluations. District evaluation procedures allow in-class observation of students. If the school district observes your child in his or her classroom during an evaluation or if the school district would have been allowed to observe your child, an individual conducting an independent educational evaluation must also be allowed to observe your child in the classroom. If the school district proposes a new school setting for your child and an independent educational evaluation is being conducted, the independent evaluator must be allowed to first observe the proposed new setting. Local Mediation/Alternative Dispute Resolution: Districts and Charter Schools (LEAs) have the opportunity to resolve parent concerns and complaints at the local level through individual Uniform Complaint Process/Procedures which are described in the LEA’s Board Policy or Charter Petition. Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) is another voluntary method of resolving a dispute at the local level and is requested by the parent or LEA. It provides the opportunity for both the parent and LEA to meet at a convenient location and time to resolve concerns. It is facilitated by a trained ADR Coordinator. A request to schedule an ADR session is made to the Desert/Mountain SELPA, office of the Program Manager for Due Process. A request for Mediation Only is made by the parent or LEA to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) before a due process complaint is filed. Mediation Only is a voluntary process and all discussion during a mediation session is confidential. Attorneys or advocates are not in attendance during a Mediation Only session. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) from OAH is assigned to facilitate this confidential process. The Uniform Complaint Process, ADR, and Mediation Only are voluntary methods of resolving a dispute and may not delay a parent’s right to a due process hearing. All three methods are less adversarial and allow all parties to resolve the concerns in a timely manner. The mandatory early resolution session (ERS) and mediation are the first two steps in the three step process initiated when a parent files a due

process complaint with OAH. Attorneys and advocates are invited to attend both the ERS and Mediation session when a due process complaint has been filed. [Proposed Changes 07/15] Due Process Hearing: You have the right to request an impartial due process hearing regarding the identification, evaluation, educational placement or the provision of a free, appropriate public education for your child. The request for a due process hearing must be filed within two years from the date you knew, or had reason to know of the facts that are the basis for the hearing request. There is an exception to this timeline if you were prevented from requesting a hearing earlier because the district misrepresented that it had resolved the problem or withheld information that should have been provided to you. Requests for a hearing are to be sent to the Office of Administrative Hearings, Special Education Unit, 1102 Q Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. Requests must include the student’s name, residential address, the name of the student’s school, a description of the problem, facts about the problem and a proposed resolution. A due process hearing may not take place until the party or the attorney representing the party files a notice that meets these requirements. Due Process Rights: You have a right to: • A fair and impartial administrative hearing at the state level before a person

who is knowledgeable of the laws governing special education and administrative hearings

• Be accompanied and advised by an attorney and/or individuals who have knowledge about children with disabilities

• Present evidence, written arguments, and oral arguments • Confront, cross-examine, and require witnesses to be present • Receive a written or electronic verbatim record of the hearing, including

findings of fact and decisions • Have your child present at the hearing • Have the hearing open or closed to the public • Be informed by the other parties of the issues and their proposed resolution

of the issues at least ten calendar days prior to the hearing • Within five business days before a hearing, receive a copy of all documents,

including assessments completed by that date and recommendations, and a list of witnesses and their general area of testimony

• Have an interpreter provided • Request an extension of the hearing timeline • Have a mediation conference at any point during the hearing • Receive notice from the other party at least ten days prior to the hearing that

it intends to be represented by an attorney Filing a Written Due Process Complaint: Whenever a request for a due process hearing has been filed, you and the district have the opportunity for an impartial due process hearing which is conducted by officials of the State. Within 15 days of receiving the notice of the complaint and prior to the opportunity for an impartial due process hearing, the district shall convene a Resolution Meeting with you and the other relevant members of the IEP team who have specific knowledge of the facts contained in the complaint. This meeting includes a representative of the district who has decision-making authority on behalf of the district. The district will not have an attorney present at this meeting unless an attorney accompanies you. During the Resolution Meeting, you discuss the complaint and the district is provided the opportunity to resolve the complaint. You and the district can agree to waive the Resolution Meeting or agree to the mediation process. If a resolution is reached at the meeting, the parties will execute a written agreement that is signed by both you and the district. Either party may void the agreement within 3 business days. If the complaint is not resolved within 30 days of receiving the complaint, the due process hearing may take place and all applicable timelines will commence. Mediation is a voluntary method of resolving a dispute and may not be used to delay your right to a due process hearing. The parents and the school district must agree to try mediation before mediation is attempted. A mediator is a person who is trained in strategies that help people come to agreement over difficult issues. The child involved in any administrative or judicial proceeding must remain in the current educational placement pending the decision of the hearing officer or



D/M 77 Rev. 08/15 Page 3 of 3

45 school days whichever comes first, unless you and the school district agree on another arrangement. If you are applying for initial admission to a public school, your child may be placed in a public school program with parental consent until all proceedings are completed. The hearing decision is final and binding on both parties. Either party can appeal the hearing decision by filing a civil action in state or federal court within 90 days of the final decision. Attorney Fees: In any action or proceeding regarding a due process hearing, a court, in its discretion, may award reasonable attorney’s fees as part of the costs to you as parent of a child with a disability if you are the prevailing party in the hearing. Reasonable attorney fees may also be awarded following the conclusion of the administrative hearing with the agreement of the parties. The court may also award attorney fees to the State or district if the attorney of the parent files the claim or subsequent cause of action that is frivolous, unreasonable, and without foundation or is presented for any improper use such as harassment, delay or needlessly increasing the cost of litigation. Fees may be reduced if any of the following conditions prevail: (1) the court finds that you unreasonably delayed the final resolution of the controversy; (2) the hourly attorney fees exceed the prevailing rate in the community for similar services by attorneys of reasonably comparable skill, reputation, and experience; (3) the time spent and legal services provided were excessive; (4) your attorney did not provide to the school district the appropriate information in the due process complaint. Attorney fees will not be reduced, however, if the court finds that the state or the school district unreasonably delayed the final resolution of the action or proceeding or there was a violation of this section of law. Attorney fees may not be awarded relating to any meeting of the IEP team unless an IEP meeting is convened as a result of a due process hearing proceeding or judicial action. Attorney fees may also be denied if you reject a reasonable settlement offer made by the district/public agency at least ten days before the hearing begins and the hearing decision is not more favorable than the settlement offer. Complaint Regarding Violation of a State or Federal Law: You may file a complaint with the California Department of Education if you believe the district has, or is, violating a state or federal law. You may send a written complaint to the California Department of Education, Special Education Division, Procedural Safeguards Referral Service, 1430 N Street, Suite 2401, 515 L Street, Room 270, Sacramento, CA 95814. This is NOT the same thing as filing for due process. Within 60 days after a complaint is filed, the California Department of Education will carry out an independent investigation, give the complainant an opportunity to provide additional information and make a determination as to whether the district has violated laws or regulations and issue a written decision that addresses the allegations. Complaints not involving IDEA 2004 generally fall under the Uniform Complaint Procedures in each district. School Discipline and Placement Procedures for Students with Disabilities: Children with disabilities may be suspended or placed in other alternative interim settings or other settings to the same extent these options would be used for children without disabilities. If a child exceeds ten consecutive days in such a placement, or more than ten cumulative days in certain circumstances, an IEP meeting must be held to determine whether the child's misconduct was a manifestation of his/her disability. This IEP meeting must take place immediately, if possible, or within ten days of the school district's decision to take this type of disciplinary action. As a parent, you will be invited to participate as a member of this IEP team to help determine if your child’s behavior was a manifestation of their disability. If the team determines that this is the case, the school district may be required to develop an assessment plan to address the misconduct or if your child has a behavior intervention plan, review and modify the plan, as necessary. If the IEP team concludes that the misconduct was not a manifestation of your child's disability, the school district might take disciplinary action, such as expulsion, in the same manner as it would for a child without disabilities. If you disagree with the IEP team's decision, you may request an expedited due process hearing from the Office of Administrative Hearings, Special Education Unit.

Alternative Interim Educational Settings: Federal and state laws allow the use of alternative educational placements for up to forty-five school days if a child with a disability carries a weapon, knowingly possesses or uses illegal drugs, inflicts serious bodily injury or sells or solicits the sale of a controlled substance while at school or at a school function. An alternative educational setting must be determined by an IEP team that allows the child to: continue to participate in the general curriculum, although in another setting; ensure continuation of services and modifications detailed in the IEP. Unilateral Placement by Parents in Private School: If you enroll your child in a private school, you may be entitled to reimbursement for the cost of a private school from the school district, including special education and related services, if the court or hearing officer determines that the school district has not made a free and appropriate public education available to your child. You must first attempt to obtain consent of the school district, and you must also establish that the school district does not have an appropriate program for your child. When reimbursement may be reduced or denied. The court or hearing officer may reduce or deny reimbursement for private school costs if you did not make your child available for an assessment upon notice from the school district before removing your child from public school. If you have not complied with these requirements, a court may find that you acted unreasonably in unilaterally removing your child from the public school and placing your child in a private school. Your request for reimbursement may also be reduced or denied if you did not inform the school district that you were rejecting the special education placement proposed by the school district and/or you failed to give the school district notice of your concerns and your intent to enroll your child at a private school at public expense. Your notice to the school district must be given either: • At the most recent IEP meeting you attended before removing your child

from the public school; or • In writing, to the school district at least ten business days (including

holidays) before removing your child from the public school. A court or hearing officer may not reduce or deny reimbursement to you if you failed to give this notice for any of the following reasons: illiteracy and inability to write in English; giving notice would likely result in physical or serious emotional harm to the child; the school prevented you from giving notice; or you had not received a copy of this Notice of Procedural Safeguards or otherwise been informed of this notice requirement. Observation of Your Child at a Nonpublic School: If you unilaterally place your child in a nonpublic school and you propose the placement in the nonpublic school to be publicly financed, the school district must be given the opportunity to observe the proposed placement and your child in the proposed placement. The school district may not observe or assess any other child at the nonpublic school without permission from the other child’s parent or guardian. State Special Schools: The State Special Schools provide services to students who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind, visually impaired, or deaf-blind at each of its three facilities: the California Schools for the Deaf in Fremont and Riverside and at the California School for the Blind in Fremont. Residential and day school programs are offered to students from infancy to age 21 at both State Schools for the Deaf and from ages five through 21 at the California School for the Blind. The State Special Schools also offer assessment services and technical assistance. Referrals for State Special Schools are part of the IEP process and parents must be referred by their local school district when considering such placements. For more information about the State Special Schools, please visit the California Department of Education Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ss/ or ask for more information from the members of your child’s IEP team.

http://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/ss/

Student Name: DOB: Date:

SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SUPPORTS

D/M 68D Rev. 08/15 DRAFT Page ____ of ____

Vision Screening: Pass Fail Parent Waived in Writing Date: Hearing Screening: Pass Fail Parent Waived in Writing Date: Comments:

Methods of reporting progress toward IEP goals: Quarter Semester Trimester Other: (describe below)

Describe how progress will be reported to parents:

Student learning strengths/preferences:

Parent priorities for enhancing student’s long-term education:

How does the student’s disability affect involvement and progress in the general curriculum? For preschool students, how does the student’s disability affect participation in appropriate activities?

Mainstream activities to provide support for transition into general education:

CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL FACTORS Is the student blind or visually impaired? Yes No

If “YES” is the instruction provided in Braille and the use of Braille? Yes No If “NO” state rationale based on evaluation of the student’s reading and writing skills, appropriate reading and writing media, and the student’s future needs for instruction in Braille and the use of Braille:

Is the student deaf or hard of hearing? Yes No If “YES” • Have the communication needs of the student been considered? Yes No • Has the opportunity for direct communication with peers and professional Yes No personnel in the student’s communication mode and at the student’s academic level been considered? • Has the student’s full range of communication needs been considered, Yes No including opportunities for direct instruction in the student’s language communication mode?

Has the IEP team considered the student’s functional performance and does the student have Yes No needs in this area? If “YES” • Have functional goals been developed and included in this IEP? Yes No

Is the student an English Language Learner (ELL)? If “YES” Yes No

• Have the language needs of the student been considered? Yes No • Does the student have linguistically appropriate goals, objectives, programs Yes No and services?

Does the student’s behavior impede his or her learning or the learning of others? Yes No • Have positive behavioral interventions and supports been implemented? Yes No • Have annual behavioral goals been implemented and revised as needed? Yes No • Has a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) been completed? Yes No • Has a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) been implemented and revised as needed? Yes No Has the IEP team considered the student’s need for assistive technology (AT) devices Yes No and services?

Needs are currently being met without AT. AT is not required at this time. AT devices/services are required and will be used in designated task(s) in educational environments. Further information/assessment is necessary to determine if or what AT devices and services may be required.

Please explain:

Student Name: DOB: Date:

SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SUPPORTS

D/M 68D Rev. 08/15 DRAFT Page ____ of ____

Supplementary aids and supports to the student and/or program modification(s)/support(s) for school personnel (to be provided during the effective dates of this IEP) that are necessary to enable the student to: (A) advance appropriately toward the IEP goal attainment; (B) be involved and progress in the general curriculum; (C) participate in extracurricular activities; (D) be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and with nondisabled peers. 34 CFR § 300.320(a)(4)-(7)

SUPPLEMENTARY AIDS AND SUPPORTS PROGRAM ACCOMMODATION(S) / MODIFICATION(S) LOCATION START DATE FREQUENCY DURATION

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Student Personnel

Comments:

D/M 170 New 8/15 DRAFT Developed by Joy Zabal, Educational Specialist, [email protected] Page 1 of 2

DESERT/MOUNTAIN SPECIAL EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA DESERT/MOUNTAIN CHARTER SPECIAL EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA 17800 HIGHWAY 18 • APPLE VALLEY, CA 92307 (760) 552-6700 • (760) 242-5363 FAX

The Student Environments Tasks & Tools (SETT) Framework

A COLLABORATIVE PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING TOOL

Date: What is the student expected to do?

Student:

School: What are the goals?

Team Members:

What are the curricular expectations?

Student (general strengths, abilities, special needs, functional areas of concern, achievements,

interests, goals, likes and dislikes)

Environment (location, time of day, physical arrangement, existing supports)

Tasks (specific activities and their critical elements-prioritized as related to goals and objectives)

Tools (strategies and interventions that might

improve performance within the educational environments)

General strengths: e.g., describe performance compared to peers,

technology availability and how peers use technology, transitions, supports and barriers, and in what environment the student is having the most difficulty.

e.g., what is the student expected to do?

Universal (currently utilized by student):

Present levels of performance:

Targeted (what interventions or tools does the student need to achieve a particular goal or objective?):

Functional areas of concern: Potential Tools (individualized):

D/M 170 New 8/15 DRAFT Developed by Joy Zabal, Educational Specialist, [email protected] Page 2 of 2

The Student Environments Tasks & Tools (SETT) Framework

Action plan: Who will do what by when

Who Will do what When

CONSIDERATION SUMMARY OF POSSIBLE ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY SERVICES: If the team has determined that assistive technology is required, describe what will be provided, (existing tools, adaptation/modification of existing tools; additional interventions, accommodation, or other program modifications; technical assistance on device operation or use; training of student, staff, or family members; and/or referral for an assistive technology assessment.)

Decision Consideration Summary

Needs are currently being met without assistive technology. It is anticipated that current goals can be worked toward without assistive technology devices or services. Assistive technology is not necessary at this time.

It is anticipated that adequate progress cannot be made without the support of assistive technology. Assistive technology devices/services are required by this student and will be used for designated tasks in educational environments. (Specify nature and duration in the plan.)

Further information/assessment is necessary to determine if or what assistive technology devices and services may be required. (Specify nature and timeline of information/assessment in the plan.)

List assistive technology devices and services to be provided. Include

those currently used successfully and those to be tried or added. Responsible Parties Projected Start Date Duration

D/M 137 Rev. 08/15 DRAFT Page _____ of _____ Behavioral Intervention Plan, Diana Browning Wright, PENT, 2013. Adapted with permission.

DESERT/MOUNTAIN SPECIAL EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA DESERT/MOUNTAIN CHARTER SPECIAL EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA 17800 HIGHWAY 18 • APPLE VALLEY, CA 92307 (760) 552-6700 • (760) 242-5363 FAX

Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP) For behavior interfering with student’s learning or the learning of his/her peers

This BIP attaches to: IEP Date: 504 Plan Update: Team Meeting Date:

Student Name: KARL X. ADEQUATE Today’s Date: Next Review Date:

1. The behavior impeding learning is: (Describe what it looks like.) Karl displays aggression to peers and staff as observed by forcefully pushing with two hands, hitting with an open hand and/or fist, and kicking.

2. It impedes learning because: It distracts from Karl's learning and the learning of others.

3. The need for a Behavioral Intervention Plan: Early Stages Moderate Serious Extreme

4. The frequency/intensity/duration of behavior: The frequency of the behavior ranges from a low of one time within a two week period to approximately 10 aggressive behaviors a day. The intensity of the behaviors range from causing pain that resides momentarily up to the level of causing serious injury to others, such as fracturing an ankle.

Reported by: Teacher and/or Observed by: Teacher, paraprofessional, speech therapist

PREVENTION PART I: ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND NECESSARY CHANGES

OB

SER

VA

TIO

N &

AN

ALY

SIS

5. Indicate the predictors for the behavior: (List situations in which the behavior is likely to occur: physical setting, social setting, instructional strategies, curriculum and activities, scheduling factors, degree of independence, degree of participation, social interaction, degree of choice.) 1. The absence of calmness and consistency in Karl's environment. 2. An adult who does not use a non-threatening, slow-paced, quiet cadenced voice. 3. A highly stimulating environment with high noise levels and close proximity to many people. 4. The removal of comfort object(s) that Karl has selected for that day. 5. Unstructured play opportunities. 6. The switch in adult supervision as his 1:1 instructional aide leaves for lunch break. 7. Karl's lack of awareness of behavioral expectations.

6. Indicate what supports the student using the problem behavior: (List what is missing in the environment and curriculum, or what is in the environment and curriculum that needs changing: physical setting, social setting, instructional strategies, curriculum and activities, scheduling factors, degree of independence, degree of participation, social interaction, degree of choice.) 1. The absence of consistent staff interactions (i.e., the nature of the interactions). 2. The absence of structured environment at all times. 3. The absence of clear behavioral expectations. 4. Minimal opportunities to make choices. 5. Karl does not have a consistent way to communicate his needs and wants.

REMOVE STUDENT’S NEED TO USE THE PROBLEM BEHAVIOR

INT

ER

VE

NTI

ON

7. Indicate the environmental changes, structure, and supports necessary to remove the student’s need to use this behavior: (List changes in physical setting, social setting, instructional strategies, curriculum and activities, scheduling factors, degree of independence, degree of participation, social interaction, degree of choice to remove likelihood of behavior.) 1. Train staff working with Karl to communicate through the use of a calm, quiet, slow cadenced, consistent, non-threatening voice with minimal words. 2. Develop a structured visual schedule for Karl that includes scheduled opportunities for access to his calming object/activity. 3. Prior to engaging in an activity, Karl will be given clear expectations as to what will be expected of him (what he will do, and the amount of time he will do it.) 4. Provide Karl with a variety of visual choices during instructional time and teach Karl a strategy for choosing and following through with the visual choice. 5. Staff will be aware of times when Karl may be overstimulated and should then provide Karl with visual choices (beanbag, blanket, quiet area, walk, etc.) 6. Do not take Karl's calming object from him.

Who will establish? Teacher/Speech Therapist Who will monitor? Teacher/Paraprofessionals Frequency? Daily

SAMPLE

Behavioral Intervention Plan for Date of Birth:


ALTERNATIVES PART II: FUNCTIONAL FACTORS AND NEW BEHAVIORS TO TEACH AND SUPPORT

OB

SER

VA

TIO

N &

AN

ALY

SIS

8. The team believes the behavior occurs because: (State the function of behavior in terms of getting or avoiding/escaping something.) 1. To get calming activities. 2. To avoid overstimulating activities. 3. To communicate a protest over removal of his calming object or staff not using a calm, non-threatening tone of voice. 4. To socialize and/or initiate play with peers and adults.

ACCEPT A REPLACEMENT BEHAVIOR THAT MEETS SAME NEED

9. The team believes the student should do the following instead of the problem behavior: (List how the student should get or avoid/escape to get his/her need met in an acceptable way.) FERB for function #1, 2 and 3: Use visual symbols to request calming activities. FERB for function #4: Initiate social interactions with peers and adults by verbalizing "play please" and exchanging a visual representation of play with "play please" printed on it. (This should be available to Karl at all times.)

INT

ER

VE

NTI

ON

10. The teaching strategies, curriculum, or materials needed: (List successive teaching steps for students to learn replacement behaviors.) FERB for function #1, 2 and 3: Prepare a page of visual calming activities for Karl. Teach Karl how to select visual symbols to request calming activities. Teach Karl what each symbol means by allowing him to connect the visual with the calming activity. Teach by modeling, prompting and cueing with gradual fading of model and prompt. FERB for function #4: Prepare a visual symbol of "play please" on a 2x3" card. Teach Karl to give a visual symbol and/or verbalize "play please" when he wants social interactions with a peer or adult. Use a model, prompt, cue strategy during all practice sessions. Practice sessions will occur during naturally occuring times during the school day (recess, breaks, etc.). Karl will be able to request "play please" at all times initially. When teaching "play please," Karl will immediately get a token on his "interval based reinforcement system," even if it is during work time and/or requires assistance from a staff member in order to be used correctly. (see #11 for reinforcement system) General positive behaviors to increase: 1. Teach Karl to follow a structured visual schedule in the correct sequence, and to understand the concept of "finished," and "next." Practice sessions will be provided at beginning of the day and at each transition during the day. 2. Prepare 3x3" visuals of hands and feet that read "nice hands" and "nice feet." Teach Karl what it means to have "nice hands" and "nice feet" using modeling and role playing of both examples and non-examples. When Karl uses "nice hands" and "nice feet," tell him "good job Karl, you have nice hands and/or nice feet," and show him the visual(s). Staff working with Karl should carry visuals of hands and feet at all ltimes so that they can be used to reinforce good behavior and to act as visual reminders when he appears to escalate in his aggression.

Who will establish? Teacher Who will monitor? Teacher/Paraprofessionals Frequency? Daily

11. Indicate the reinforcement procedures to use for establishing, maintaining, and generalizing the replacement behavior(s): Karl will use an "interval based reinforcement system" where every 10 minutes that he displays "nice hands" and "nice feet," he will receive a minimum of two points to reinforce his desired behavior. 1. Karl will "make a deal" prior to each interval by selecting a desired reinforce that he will get after earning two points. See attached list of preferred activities and/or objects. 2. A visual timer will be set for 10 minutes and shown to Karl. 3. When displaying "nice hands," "nice feet," Karl will be given a point that he will place on his chart (token economy system). (This is a visual reinforcement system with two boxes to place points, an equals sign, and then a picture of the chosen reinforce.). [point, point = reinforcer] 4. After 10 minutes, if Karl has earned two points, he will receive his pre-selected reinforcement. *Once Karl displays the ability to earn two points within a 10 minute period with ease, the time will gradually increase as appropriate.

Selection of reinforcers based on: Karl's current cognitive and social abilities and his preferences for earning points as evidenced by behavior in

previous settings.

Reinforcers for using replacement behavior Reinforcers for general increase in positive behaviors By whom? All Staff Frequency? As requested by Karl and multiple times daily during 10 minute intervals



EFFECTIVE REACTION PART III: REACTIVE STRATEGIES

EFF

EC

TIV

E R

EA

CT

ION

PA

RT

III:

RE

AC

TIV

E S

TR

AT

EG

IES

12. The strategies that will be employed if the problem behavior occurs again: a. Prompt student to switch to the replacement behavior: If Karl is attempting to gain access to calming objects/activities, avoid

overstimulating situations, or protest; prompt Karl to communicate his needs by exchanging a visual representation of a desired calming object or activity; OR if Karl is attempting to initiate social interactions or play, prompt Karl to exchange the card with visual and words "play".

Who will establish? All Staff Who will monitor? Frequency?

b. Describe how staff should handle the situation if the problem behavior continues to occur and/or escalate: If Karl escalates and displays another aggressive behavior, staff members must guide Karl to the designated "time away" (cool down) area. Staff will do so by getting in close proximity to Karl and physically guiding him by standing behind and to the side of him, use their arms to guide him at the midline of his back, and block flailing arms. Staff will only direct Karl by using a calm, non-emotional voice, and will repeat the phrase, "Karl, calm down." Once Karl is seated in his "time away" area, staff will set the timer for two minutes. Staff must remain in close proximity to Karl (2-3 feet and seated). Staff will remain quiet and still until Karl is calm. If Karl needs more than two minutes to calm down, staff will reset the timer until he is calm and quiet.

Who will stablish? All Staff Who will monitor? Frequency?

c. Positive discussions with student after behavior ends: When Karl is calm, staff will redirect Karl to his daily schedule and the next scheduled activity and remind Karl what he needs to do to gain access to reinforcement, then reset the visual timer for 10 minutes.

Who will establish? All Staff Who will monitor? Frequency?

* O P T I O N A L d. *Any necessary further classroom or school consequences:

Who will establish? Who will monitor? Frequency?

OUTCOME PART IV: BEHAVIORAL GOALS



13. Behavior Goal(s): a. REQUIRED: FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT REPLACEMENT BEHAVIORAL (FERB) GOAL

By when Who Will do X behavior (line 9)

For the purpose of Y (line 8)

Instead of Z behavior (line 1)

For the purpose of Y (line 8)

Under what conditions

At what level of proficiency

As measured by whom and

how

4/2017 Karl Will independently initiate social interactions with peers and adults by saying, "play please" and/or giving the individual a visual representation (picture icon) of play

To get attention from peers

Instead of using aggressive behaviors (pushing, kicking, hitting) to initiate social interactions

To get attention from peers

When at recess and lunch

A minimum of three times in one week

Observed and recorded by staff

b. OPTIONAL GOAL: INCREASE GENERAL POSITIVE OR DECREASE PROBLEM BEHAVIOR

By when Who Will do what or will NOT do what

Under what conditions At what level of proficiency Measured by whom and how

The above behavioral goal(s) are to increase the use of replacement behavior and may include: Goal(s) to reduce frequency of problem behavior Goal(s) to develop new general skills that remove the student’s need to use the problem behavior

OBSERVATION AND ANALYSIS CONCLUSION

Are curriculum accommodations or modifications also necessary? Yes No Where described: IEP

Are environmental supports/changes necessary? Yes No Is reinforcement of replacement behavior alone enough (no new teaching is necessary)? Yes No Are both teaching of new replacement behavior AND reinforcement needed? Yes No This BIP is to be coordinated with the service plans of other agencies? Yes No Person responsible for contact between agencies:

COMMUNICATION PART V: COMMUNICATION PROVISIONS

14. The manner and content of communication:

Who Under what condition(s) (a) Contingent? (b) Continuous?

Delivery manner Expected frequency Content How will this be two-way communication?

Teacher Contingent and continuous

A home school communication book will be sent back and forth from home to school in Karl's backpack

Once a week Summary of the number of times that Karl initiated play with others using his card + verbal system and with what level of independence he was able to do so. Teacher

Parent will return the notebook with a note of how Karl appeared to respond to the rewards he had earned and their praise for earning them. Parent will report use of play and initiate strategy at home for



will report the items that Karl chose for his reinforcement during the week

generalization checks. If physical injury to staff or peers occur, the teacher will communicate with parent and team to arrange a time to review the incident and incident report and review/revise plan as necessary

PARTICIPATION PART VI: PARTICIPANTS IN PLAN DEVELOPMENT

Student: Date: Parent/Guardian: Date: Parent/Guardian: Date: Educator/Title: Date: Educator/Title: Date: Educator/Title: Date: Administrator: Date: Other: Date: Other: Date:

OT Caseload Distribution 2015-16

Janet Ray (72)

Lori Gonzales (95)

Lisa Sutton 8/7 (90)

Jessica Marfia (94)

Tiffanie Newman (97)

Suzan Raymond (83)

Toni Griffin (89)

Michael Brooksby (76)

Marisa Ficalora (81)

Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments: Mo. Treatments:

Courtney Reed Terry Helin Brandy Biggs Amy Lipchik Anna Su Crystal Rivas Rachel Krumm Shannon Bergfeld Sheila Perkins8/5/15-6/3/16 D/M SELPA 8/5/15- 6/3/16 8/5/15 - 6/3/16 8/5/15 - 6/3/16 8/5/15-6/3/16 8/5/15 - 6/3/16 8/12/15 - 6/3/16 8/10/15-6/3/16

Terry Helin(1 day wk)

Bear Valley 29 AAE 15 Encore Charter 9 Hesperia 33 AAE/Norton 9 Adelanto SD 1 Barstow 89 Apple Valley 57 Silver Valley 14Baldwin Lane Elem 3/1 AAE/Apple Valley 4/11 Encore 9 Carmel 1/4 Norton 1/8 Mt. View AES 1 Barstow Jr HS 15/11 Granite Hills HS 2 Newberry Springs 4Big Bear MS 4 Juniper 8 Barstow High 1/9 Phoenix 2/12 Yermo 2/8Big Bear HS 2 Kingston 3/4 Apple Valley 13 Helendale SD 8 Cameron 6/22 Rancho Verde 2/9North Shore 5/14 Krystal 1/1 Phoenix 4/9 Helendale Elem 2/6 Crestline 1/2 Sitting Bull Acad 8/12 Victor Elem SD 39

Sultana HS 10/1 Henderson Elem 5 Sycamore Rocks 5 Brentwood 2/8Lenwood 10/7 Vanguard 3/2 Challenger 1/9

Del Rey 1/3Silver Valley 32 Apple Valley 60 Hesperia 65 VESD 56 Hesperia 71 Hesperia 65 Barstow 19 Puesta Del Sol 1/5

Fort Irwin MS 2/2 AVHS 7/9 Cottonwood 7/18 Endeavour 5/6 Lime Street 2/13 Cedar 2/1 Montara 2/11 Village Elem 1Lewis Elem 1/14 Desert Knolls 3/7 Joshua Circle 4/7 Gaileo 6/9 Mesa Grande 6/16 Cypress 1/6 Skyline 6 West Palms 1/7Silver Valley HS 2 Mariana 7/8 Maple 1/20 Grn Tree East 1/3 Oak Hills HS 10/1 Eucalyptus 1/5Tiefort View 3/8 Rio Vista 1/7 Topaz 1/7 Irwin Acad 3/5 Ranchero MS 8/15 Hesperia Jr. 7/4 VVUHSD 28

Sandia 7 Lomitas 3/9 Hesperia HS 4/3 Silverado HS 15/13

Yucca Loma 4 Mojave Vista 4 Hollyvale 1/6Sixth Street Prep 1 Mesquite Trails 7/12VV Preschool 1 Mission Crest 4/2

Lucerne Valley 11 VESD 20 VVUHSD 16 Excelsior (North) 4Lucerne ValleyElem 1/8 Discovery 3 Adelanto HS 9/7 Excelsior (Main C) 5 Excelsior 4Lucerne MS 2 Liberty 4 Excelsior 5

Mtn View Mont 2 Oro Grande SD 9Park View 3/8 Riverside Prep 3/6

TOTAL CASELOAD 777Revised 8/7/15

Physical Therapy School Site Distribution2015-16

Mary Meng 36 Barbara Stacy 43 Codi Andersen 37Monthly Treatments Monthly Treatments Monthly Treatments

AAE 2 Adelanto SD 23 Hesperia USD 28Bradach 4 Cedar 1Eagle Ranch 5 Cottonwood 4

Apple Valley USD 22 Gus Franklin 8 Cypress 1Apple Valley HS 4 Ted Vick 4 Hollyvale 1Desert Knolls 2 West Creek 2 Joshua Circle 1High Desert Prem Acad 1 Juniper 2Mariana 2 Lime Street 3Phoenix 2 Bear Valley USD 4 Maple 4Rancho Verde 1 Big Bear MS 2 Mesquite Trails 1Rio Vista 3 Big Bear HS 1 Mission Crest 1Sandia 1 Fallsvale 1 Ranchero MS 4Sitting Bull Academy 2 Sultana HS 5Sycamore Rocks 2Yucca Loma 2 Lucerne Valley USD 3 Silver Valley USD 8

Lucerne Valley Elem 2 Lewis Elem 2Barstow USD 7 Lucerne Valley MS 1 Newberry Springs 1Barstow HS 3 Tiefort View 3Cameron 1 VVUHSD 13 Silver Valley HS 1Crestline 1 Adelanto HS 3 Yermo 1Montara 2 Hook Jr HS 1

Silverado HS 5 VVUHSD 1VV HS 4 Adelanto HS Home Hosp 1

Helendale SD 1Helendale Elem 1

Snowline JUSD 2Heritage Preschool 1Vista Verde Elem 1

Victor Elem SD 1Liberty Elem 1

Bright Futures Acad 1Rev. 8/20/15Total PT Caseload: 116

Updated as of 8/2015 i | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS Description/Content Page ABOUT THE CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF HEALTH & EDUCATION LINKED PROFESSIONS (CAHELP)

What Services/Programs Are Available? Desert/Mountain SELPA (D/M SELPA) Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA (DMCS) Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC)

Pg. 1-3

MEET THE TEAM (DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES) Pg. 3-8

PARTICIPATING LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES (LEAs) Obligation To Provide A Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)

Pg. 8

CHILD FIND Parentally-placed Children Infants And Toddlers

Pg. 8-9

IDENTIFICATION AND REFERRAL What Is Necessary To Refer A Student To The Student Study Team?

Pg. 9

ASSESSMENT AND ELIGIBILITY What Is Necessary To Assess A Student? Where Does This Process Take Place? What Is The Function Of The Evaluation Team? Who Is Included On The Evaluation Team? Initial Assessments

Pg. 9-10

IEP TEAM REQUIREMENTS Required IEP Team Members IEP Team Attendance Excusal From IEP Team Attendance Parent/Guardian Attendance IEP Team Responsibilities Development Of IEP Review And Revision Of IEP Rights Of The Parent IEP Team Meetings IEP Meetings When Required Record IEP Meetings Notice of IEP Meeting Assessment Timeline IEP Contents

Pg. 10-15

CONFIDENTIALITY Audiotape Recordings By LEA Protected

Pg. 15-16

STUDENT RECORDS Policies And Procedures Definition: Parent Definition: Student Records E-mails Access Custodian Of Records Classification, Maintenance, And Destruction of Records Personal Notes Storage Purging IQ Information From Student Records Transfer of Records Procedures Pertaining To Access To Student Records Categories Of Access Mandatory Access Permitted Access Prohibited Access Rights Of Parents To Challenge The Student Record(s)

Pg. 16-22

DUE PROCESS Resolutions Sessions When Should A Parent Participate In A Resolution Session? Mediation

Pg. 22-23

Updated as of 8/2015 ii | P a g e

TABLE OF CONTENTS Legal Requirements for Mediation

Appendixes

APPENDIX A: SELPA REFERRAL PROCEDURES P. 25-40

APPENDIX B: IEP TEAM MEMBERSHIP AND PARTICIPATION Q & A’S P. 41-43

APPENDIX C: DISCIPLINE PROCEDURES Q & A’S P. 45-51

APPENDIX D: MEDIATION AND DUE PROCESS P. 53-59

APPENDIX E: FAMILY EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS AND PRIVACY ACT (FERPA) P. 61-66

APPENDIX F: ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY P. 67-72

Updated as of 8/2015 1 | P a g e

About Us

The California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions (CAHELP), a Joint Power Authority (JPA), is a public education consortium of school districts and charter schools. Our mission statement is “The Relentless Pursuit of Whatever Works in The Life of a Child” and we achieve this mission through the programs and supports we provide to educators, children, students, families, and communities. We serve children annually through innovative behavioral health programs and we provide school districts and charter schools with consultation, special education supports, and professional development. There are three primary branches of services within the CAHELP JPA, each providing unique services to participating local education agencies (LEAs):


Desert/Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area

Desert/Mountain Children’s Center

The role of the Desert/Mountain SELPA and Charter SELPA and its participating LEAs is to provide a quality educational program appropriate to the needs of each child with a disability. The Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area is a support services office. The goal of the Desert/Mountain SELPA is to facilitate growth and promote success for all children and youth by providing quality educational services and supports. The Desert/Mountain SELPA serves as a liaison to

school districts to consult in the area of effectiveness of special education through review and modification, coordinate services among schools and community resources, and provide professional development to school administrators, teachers and paraprofessionals. The Desert/Mountain SELPA serves as the sponsor for the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) which is a forum for collaboration among school administrators, teachers, parents and community partners. The CAC provides several community trainings throughout each year regarding children with exceptional needs. The Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA provides supports to member charter schools throughout the State of California. Support services provided to our member charter schools are similar to services provided to the Desert/Mountain SELPA LEAs.

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) is a behavioral health program offering services to children and youth, birth to 22 years of age. The DMCC also offers a transdisciplinary team to provide a full array of services and programs comprised of a pediatrician, psychiatrist, clinical nurses, occupational therapists, and speech and language therapists. The DMCC currently provides behavioral health services in over 200 schools. Additional behavioral health services are provided in the clinic and/or in the child’s residence. The DMCC provides comprehensive assessment, individual, group and family therapy, parent education, and links to community resources. The DMCC also collaborates with a number of community organizations during the process of serving children and families. There is a long history within the organization of working closely with other service organizations such as San Bernardino County Department of Behavioral Health, Child and Family Services, Juvenile Probation, community-based behavioral health organizations, and foster/adoption agencies.


What Services Are Available? In general, the entities within the CAHELP JPA provide the following services to participating LEAs:

Program

• Consult with LEAs to improve the effectiveness of special education through program review and corrective actions.

• Coordinate services among LEAs and community agencies.

• Identify needs for new classes and services.

• Provide standardized policies and procedures

for the operation of special education programs within the SELPA.

Support Services

• Provide direct assistance to administrators, individual teachers, resource specialists, and support staff as requested.

• Provide regional staff development programs in areas of need specified by participating LEAs, specialists, and parents.

• Provide behavioral health services to eligible

students.

• Facilitate the education of students with learning problems in the general education environment.

• Coordinate interagency agreements.

• Promote community awareness.

• Assure the education of persons with

disabilities in the least restrictive environment.

• Arrange for specialized assessments.

• Facilitate professional collaboration groups.

• Coordinate transition services from school to

work.

• Coordinate nonpublic school and residential treatment center placements.

Curriculum

• Coordinate curriculum resources.

• Participate in the innovation of new methods and approaches.

• Coordinate the evaluation of special

education program effectiveness.

• Provide assistance to meet state and federal mandates.

Fiscal

• Provide direct assistance to LEAs in financial management.

• Collect Management Information System (MIS) data on students served in special education programs.

Individual Protections

• Assist LEAs and parents with issues of individual protection, due process, and compliance.

• Provide legal assistance and interpretation of special education laws.

Community Advisory Committee (CAC)

The CAC consists of parents, teachers, representatives from school districts, and representatives of interested agencies within the SELPA. The CAC provides educational programs for persons interested in special education related issues, and provides input to the CAHELP JPA Governance Council regarding the Local Plan. The SELPA Liaison provides support to the CAC.

Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC)

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center is contracted with the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) and the SELPA, to meet the therapeutic needs of children and adolescents. The DMCC assists clients in developing skills to reach their full potential. Referrals may be made through schools, parents, physicians, and guardians. In general, the DMCC provides the following services to participating LEAs: assessment, evaluation, collateral, school-based counseling, therapy, rehabilitation, plan development, medication support, and case management.

DMCC PROGRAMS & SERVICES Children’s Intensive Services (CIS) Early Identification Intervention Services (EIIS) School-Aged Treatment Services (SATS) Screening Assessment Referral & Treatment (SART) Student Assistance Program (SAP)


Children’s Intensive Services. Children’s Intensive Services (CIS) provides short-term (4 - 12 weeks) intensive home-based therapeutic and support services to families with one or more children who are at imminent risk of being removed from their family and put into out-of-home placement. CIS services are offered on a voluntary basis to these select families, and the family must agree to the terms of the service. CIS is provided in the child’s primary language. CIS addresses the immediate needs of the family to prevent placement. Families are often referred to community resources and mental health programs as needed for ongoing and longer-term services. CIS is provided to support ongoing primary behavioral health services such as school-aged treatment services or case management.

Early Identification, Intervention Services. Early Identification, Intervention Services (EIIS) is specifically for infants and young children who may display some type of developmental, behavioral concern or who are at risk for disabilities or special needs. The purpose of EIIS is to identify mild concerns in order to provide early intervention to the child “at risk.” EIIS services are provided through a variety of activities, both clinical and non-clinical, to ensure that these children grow to their greatest potential.

School-Aged Treatment Services. School-Aged Treatment Services (SATS) provides individual, group, and family counseling services for children and youth ages 7 to 22 years of age. This program accepts Medi-Cal, IEHP, TriCare, PacifiCare, Molina, and cash pay on a sliding scale for services provided. Referrals may be made through the child’s school, parents, physicians, and/or caregivers. The SATS program is primarily provided at each child’s school, but is also offered in the home, clinic, and community as needed.

Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment. The Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment (SART) program utilizes a team of highly qualified professionals to screen, assess, refer, and treat children birth through six years of age. The SART program is designed to provide services to children who may have been prenatally exposed to drugs, alcohol, and/or violence. The SART program also addresses concerns with children experiencing behavioral problems and difficulties maintaining appropriate behaviors in pre-school settings and the child’s home. The SART program offers a comprehensive screening process, assessment,

and appropriate referrals to excellent treatment to improve overall functioning of the child. The DMCC provides medication support and management upon referral from the treating therapist to the DMCC medical doctor.

Student Assistance Program. The Student Assistance Program (SAP) serves students, their families, and the school community. Students who are dealing with non-academic barriers to learning are the primary target for SAP services. Students are referred by staff, parents, or concerned others to the program. Students may also self-refer. The purpose of SAP is to (1) reduce risk factors, barriers, and stressors of children, youth, and their families, (2) provide appropriate strategies, interventions, and activities to school staff and families that increase their knowledge of social, emotional, and behavioral issues, and (3) to increase student awareness of the issues they face daily, including the social and emotional choices that impact their lives.

CAHELP Jenae Holtz, CEO/SELPA Administrator CAHELP JPA E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3556 The SELPA Administrator serves as the chief administrator of the SELPA to coordinate the implementation of the Local Plan for special education on behalf of participating LEAs. The fundamental role of the SELPA Administrator is to provide leadership and facilitate the decision-making process regarding the implementation of the Local Plan. The SELPA Administrator’s role includes the provision of information, specific services identified by the CAHELP JPA Governance Council, technical assistance,



leadership, and arbitration. It is the SELPA Administrator’s responsibility to represent the interests of the SELPA as a whole without promoting any particular LEA’s interest over the interest of any other agency. In the event there are differences of opinions and/or positions on issues, it is the SELPA Administrator’s responsibility to mediate a reasonable resolution of the issue(s).

Jennifer Sutton, Interim Operations Officer CAHELP JPA E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3554 The CAHELP JPA Operations Officer (OO) manages the day-to-day operations of the CAHELP JPA and the non-profit organization. The OO develops departmental short-term and long-term operations goals and strategies and develops departmental policies and procedures. The OO evaluates the programs, services, staffing, and facilities to maximize program effectiveness in support of the CAHELP JPA’s and non-profit organization’s strategic vision and mission.

Janet Crabtree, Program Manager CAHELP JPA E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-946-8200, ext. 268 The Program Manager is responsible for the fiscal analysis and oversight of department programs of the CAHELP JPA. The Program Manager conducts high-level analysis, including the impact of legislative proposals on programs, develops fee-for-service models, and recommends strategies for effective fiscal monitoring. The Program Manager also acts as an assist to the CEO of the CAHELP JPA to contribute to effective operations and provides direct oversight over the business division within the SELPA and the DMCC.

Program Managers Corinne Foley, Program Manager Regional Services E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3569 The Program Manager – Regional Services interacts with all LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries, to determine staff development needs, initiate training activities/programs, and manage resources available to support staff development training

and transition services for all individuals who are responsible for special education and youth with disabilities. Activities are initiated through the SELPA Steering Committee as well as with various teacher/administrator groups. The Program Manager – Regional Services assists with:

• Coordination of program specialists’ services.

• Coordination of SELPA personnel development activities.

• Develop, facilitate, implement and evaluate SELPA staff development programs.

• Facilitate the alignment of curriculum between special education and general education.

• Evaluate the effectiveness of programs for students with disabilities.

• Coordinate the implementation of grant and contract-funded services to students with disabilities.

Denise Edge, Program Manager Individual Protections E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3568 The Program Manager - Individual Protections assists and/or conducts the procedures involved in due process hearings, complaints, and investigations for all participating LEAs within SELPA including LEAs that are out of geographic boundaries. Inherent to this assignment is dissemination of information and initiation of procedures that ensure compliance with all parent/child rights and requirements. These include the availability of parent/child rights notices, equal access to programs, correction of identified program/service problems, and compliance with mandated timelines for assessment and placement of children. The Program Manager – Individual Protections assists with:

• Coordinating Inter/Intra-SELPA program placements.

• Developing, reviewing, and revising interagency agreements.

• Coordinating consultant/expert witness contracting.






• Negotiating contracts and coordinating services, oversight, and evaluation of nonpublic schools (NPS).

• Negotiating contracts and coordinating

services, oversight, and evaluation of private services/nonpublic agencies (NPA).

• Coordinating independent educational

evaluations (IEEs).

• Developing, reviewing, and revising compliance procedures within SELPA participating LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries.

• Advising LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries, regarding compliance procedures and changing legislation.

• Assisting LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries in complaint/mediation procedures.

• Representing LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries, in due process proceedings as appropriate.

• Coordinating legal assistance and representation for participating LEAs, including those that are out of geographic boundaries.

Due Process Analyst

Maurica Manibusan, 760-955-3553

Program Specialists To provide the most efficient and effective service to LEAs, a program specialist is assigned as the primary contact person for each LEA. That program specialist is responsible for sharing needs and concerns from the LEA with the SELPA, for receiving phone calls and answering questions from LEA staff, and for finding the person within the SELPA most knowledgeable regarding the specific need of the LEA. This allows directors to make one phone call and receive an answer rather than have to determine which individual within the SELPA may have information they need.

Danielle Côté, Program Specialist Behavior Intervention E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3584

• Academy for Academic Excellence • Encore Jr./Sr. High • Health Sciences High & Middle College • Norton Space & Aeronautics Academy • Silver Valley Unified School District

Rhonda Evans, Program Specialist Language, Speech, Hearing & Literacy E-mail: [email protected] Contact: (760) 955-3587

• Helendale School District • Lucerne Valley Unified School District • Trona Joint Unified School District • Victor Valley Union High School District

Diane Garcia, Program Specialist Early Childhood Education/Language, Speech, and Hearing E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3588

• Aveson Charter Schools • Bear Valley Unified School District • Desert/Mountain Operations, SBCSS • Snowline Joint Unified School District

Renée Garcia, Program Specialist Behavior Intervention E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3586

• Adelanto School District • Excelsior Charter Schools • Needles Unified School District

Stephanie Hedberg, Program Specialist Common Core State Standards, Curriculum-Instruction Interventions, RtI E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3583

• Baker Valley Unified School District • Barstow Unified School District • Odyssey Charter School • Oro Grande School District • Taylion High Desert Academy

Sheila Parisian, Program Specialist Assistive Technology, Curriculum-Instruction Interventions E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3567

• Desert Trails Preparatory Academy • High Tech High • LaVerne Elementary Preparatory Academy • Victor Elementary School District

Jennifer Rountree, Program Specialist Autism








E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3585

• Apple Valley Unified School District • Hesperia Unified School District

Maher “Matt” Badawi Intervention Specialist E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3593

Transition Services Adrienne Shepherd, Coordinator Transition Services E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-843-3982, extension 216 The Coordinator for Transition Services coordinates the Transition Partnership Program, WorkAbility Project I, and the CaPROMISE (Promoting the Readiness of Minors in Supplemental Security Income) programs in the SELPA. The Coordinator works with a team of Transition Case Technicians, Work Incentive and Independent Living Technicians, Social Security Income (SSI) Benefits Technicians, Job Developers, agencies, and communities to provide services and programs that assist eligible students transition from school to work and/or adult living. The Coordinator provides oversight regarding the legal mandates and ethical requirements necessary to meet IDEA Transition mandates for students with disabilities age 16 and older.

Transition Partnership Program (TPP) The Transition Partnership Program (TPP) builds partnerships between LEAs and the Department of Rehabilitation (DOR) for the purposes of successfully transitioning high school students with disabilities into meaningful employment and/or postsecondary education.

Transition Services Team

Char Harrigan, Transition Case Technician Robin Rask, Transition Case Technician Antonia Garcia, Work Incentive Technician Kevin Raines, Work Incentive Technician Isaac Medina, Independent Living Technician Ivan Wilkins, Independent Living Technician Bobbie Taylor, Transition Project Assistant Kaori Hartzler, Program Technician

CaPROMISE

The CaPROMISE is a joint initiative of the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Social Security Administration, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Labor. The goal of CaPROMISE is increased self-sufficiency for SSI children and their families. CaPROMISE is a research study which is attempting to address the primary barriers to successful employment for transitioning youth with disabilities on SSI. This project identifies youth ages 14 to 16 who are SSI recipients and randomly assigns them either to a control group who will receive typical services or to a participant group in which they will receive usual typical services plus CaPROMISE augmented services.

PROMISE Team

April Hamilton, SSI Benefits Technician James Manibusan, SSI Benefits Technician Alani Mundo, SSI Benefits Technician Jessica Thompson, SSI Benefits Technician

Children’s Center Linda Llamas, Director Desert/Mountain Children’s Center E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3606 The Director for the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) oversees the behavioral health services provided to children ages birth to 22. The Director administers the DMCC, including the SART assessment center and treatment programs, works closely with SELPA personnel to monitor and assess behavioral health topics that affect children and LEAs. The Director evaluates and formulates department priorities and recommends department operation strategies. The Director of the DMCC assists with:

• Administering the DMCC and satellite office operations.

• Establishing goals, priorities, and systems for current, proposed, and continuing programs.

• Reviewing department budget.

• Developing strategies to resolve complex administrative, fiscal, and operational issues.

• Working with other managers, internally and externally, to develop complex budgets.






• Evaluating department operations.

• Analyzing and interpreting state regulations, grant requirements, and laws affecting behavioral health services for children.

• Collaborating with community and state agencies and LEAs on behavioral health issues and services.

DMCC Program Managers:

Cheryl Goldberg-Diaz Guille Robles Burgos Theresa Vaughan

Business Division Marina Gallegos, Consultant E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-946-8200, ext. 270 The Consultant communicates with school district personnel including Superintendents, Assistant Superintendent, and Chief Accountants. The Consultant performs high-level analysis, including the impact of legislative proposals on school districts, fiscal management and reporting issues faced by County and individual school districts, business functions, and financial and budget reporting information. The Consultant works with and provides assistance to school districts in all areas of school finance and communicates with the public, governing boards, district and County Superintendent of Schools administrative staff on issues related to fiscal solvency. The Consultant works with a team of senior fiscal clerks, accounting technicians, and a fiscal manager under the direction of the CAHELP JPA Program Manager. Together, the business team provides supports and services in all financial related matters that affect the SELPA, member LEAs, and the DMCC.

Nonpublic School Placements Glenn Low, School Psychologist Nonpublic School Coordinator Residential Placement E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3566 The Nonpublic School Coordinator serves as a liaison between SELPA participating LEAs, nonpublic schools (NPS), licensed children’s

institutions (LCIs), parents, and foster youth agencies. The NPS Coordinator may serve as the LEA representative for NPS placed LCI students. For compliance with AB 1858, the NPS Coordinator provides local NPS monitoring and support. In addition, the NPS Coordinator serves as the educational case manager for students receiving educationally-related residential placement services.

Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports (PBIS) Kami Murphy, Coordinator Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3582 The Coordinator, PBIS, works under the direction of the Program Manager for Regional Services. The Coordinator is responsible for facilitating and managing the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports programs/services provided through the SELPA. The Coordinator performs duties designed to support LEAs in implementing the PBIS framework; providing technical assistance; designing, implementing, and identifying professional development opportunities; modifying curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of all student learners; and providing coaching and mentoring on effective schooling for all students.

PBIS Team

Natalie Sedano, PBIS Specialist Kristee Laiva, PBIS Specialist Jennifer Harms, Program Technician

SELPA Management Information Systems (MIS) Colette Garland, MIS Support Analyst SELPA MIS/Web IEP E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 760-955-3565 The MIS Support Analyst for SELPA is responsible for the development, implementation, and delivery of computer training classes to participating LEAs in the SELPA. The MIS Support Analyst provides software support, assistance, and guidance to system users. Additional responsibilities include the preparation of SELPA-level and state






reporting submissions for pupil count, annual service plan, personnel data reports, behavior emergency reports, regional services reports, and the Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP) submission. The MIS Support Analyst also participates in MIS Administrator meetings with lead programmers and the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) meetings with the California Department of Education (CDE) to provide continued compliance support.

Cindy Quan, Program Technician

Desert/Mountain SELPA • Academy for Academic Excellence • Adelanto School District • Apple Valley Unified School District • Baker Valley Unified School District • Barstow Unified School District • Bear Valley Unified School District • Excelsior Charter Schools • Explorer Elementary Charter School • Health Sciences High & Middle College • Helendale School District • Hesperia Unified School District • High Tech High • High Tech High Media Arts • High Tech High Statewide Benefit Charter • High Tech International • High Tech Middle Media Arts • High Tech Middle School • Lucerne Valley Unified School District • Needles Unified School District • Norton Space & Aeronautics Academy • Oro Grande School District • SBCSS - Desert/Mountain Operations • Silver Valley Unified School District • Snowline Joint Unified School District

• Trona Joint Unified School District • Victor Elementary School District • Victor Valley Union High School District

Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA The Desert/Mountain Charter SELPA is composed of participating LEA Charter Schools and was established and approved by the California Department of Education in July of 2013.

• Aveson Global Leadership Academy • Aveson School of Leaders • Desert Trails Preparatory Academy • Encore Charter - Riverside • Encore Jr./Sr. High School • Odyssey Charter • LaVerne Elementary Preparatory Academy • Taylion High Desert Academy

Introduction. Local Education Agencies (LEAs) have a responsibility to actively and systematically seek out all individuals with exceptional needs, from birth to 21 years of age, inclusive, including children who are not enrolled in public school programs, who reside in a school district or are under the jurisdiction of a special education local plan area or a county office of education.

It is the policy of the SELPA that all children with disabilities residing in the State of California, including children with families who are homeless or are wards of the state and children attending private schools, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, and who are in need of special education and related services are identified, located, and evaluated. These activities also apply to highly mobile individuals with exceptional needs, including migrant children, and children who are suspected of being an individual with exceptional needs and in need of special education, even though they are advancing from grade to grade. The CAHELP JPA Governance Council is responsible for establishing written policies and procedures for participating LEAs in the SELPA for a continuous child find system that addresses the relationships among the identification, screening, referral, assessment, planning, implementation, review, and triennial


assessment. The SELPA will assure that there is a process in place for out of geographic region charter schools to be in compliance with this requirement. Parentally-Placed Children. LEAs are also responsible for ensuring that all children with disabilities parentally-placed in private schools are located, identified, and evaluated to ensure the equitable participation of parentally-placed private school children in special education and related services and to provide an accurate count of those children. In general, the LEA must spend a proportionate share of federal funds for children with disabilities who are parentally-placed in private schools. The services provided to children can be direct or indirect and may be provided at the private school, including parochial schools. These services can be delivered by employees of the school district or through contracts with public agency individuals, associations, or organizations. It is the responsibility of the LEA in which the private school is located to provide the consult services that are agreed upon during the consultation process. Services, materials, and equipment must be secular, neutral, and nonideological. Children with disabilities, who are parentally-placed in private schools do not have an individual right to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). Children parentally-placed in private schools are not entitled to all services that a child would receive in a public school placement. All children affected by this will receive an Individualized Service Plan (ISP) that outlines the type of service(s), if any, that is available to students parentally-placed in private schools. Infants and Toddlers. Regional centers and LEAs are also responsible for conducting and coordinating child find activities with each other and other public agencies to locate all infants and toddlers who may be eligible for early intervention services. Legal References: 20 USC §§ 1412(a)(3), 20 USC 1412(a)(10)(A)(ii)(IV); CA Ed Code §§ 56300, 56301; 34 CCR §§ 300.111(c)52040; SELPA Policy Chapters 1 and 19.

Why is it necessary to refer a student to the Student Study Team (SST)? When a learning or behavior concern is observed (by staff or parent) in the classroom, due to a child’s academic or behavioral difficulties, the school staff must provide an intervention program that is focused on prevention and early assistance to the child. The development of an intervention plan is a function of the general education Student Study Team (SST) at that school site. If classroom intervention strategies do not result in sufficient progress, the child is then referred to the school’s intervention assistance team. This team may be the same as the SST team. Here, plans are made for modifying and adapting the general education program to meet the needs of the child who is experiencing problems in the classroom. When modification of the general instruction program cannot meet the needs of the child, the LEA may offer to assess for a 504 Plan or for eligibility for special education. A child may only be referred for an evaluation to determine special education eligibility after the resources of the general education program have been considered and exhausted in the general education setting or if a parent makes a written request for an assessment. This procedure ensures adherence to least restrictive environment with the full participation and ownership of all children by both the general education and special education staff. Each school site in the LEA is required to have an SST team. The SST team is a function of the general education program.

Why is it necessary to assess a child? An individual evaluation of the child’s current functioning and educational needs should be conducted before any action is taken with respect to the initial placement of an individual with exceptional needs in special education.


When determining eligibility for special education, there are two major things to consider:

1. Does the child meet the eligibility requirements for special education in a specific disability category?

2. Does this disability adversely impact the child’s educational performance to the extent the child requires specialized instruction?

Where does this process take place? The initial evaluation and subsequent reassessments of the child typically take place at the school site and during the school day. What is the function of the evaluation team? The members of the IEP team, including the assessors, must perform the following tasks:

1. Identify and evaluate in all areas of suspected disability.

2. Identify areas of education need.

3. Determine present levels of functioning and baselines of performance.

4. Consider any independent evaluations submitted by the parents.

Who is included on the evaluation team? It is the responsibility of the case manager (designated at the SST meeting for initial assessments) to coordinate the evaluation process with each of the evaluation personnel. Children must be assessed in all areas of suspected disability by a multidisciplinary team. Initial Assessments. The SST team may decide to develop the evaluation plan at the SST meeting. If the assessment plan is developed subsequent to this meeting, it will be sent to the parent to obtain parental consent to conduct the assessments. The following is included on the assessment plan:

1. Confidential Parent Health Questionnaire completed by the parent.

2. Vision and hearing screening (if present results are more than one year old).

3. Assessments by the following staff as needed:

• Classroom observations by team members.

• Psychologist (intellectual, affective,

sensory-motor functioning).

• Special educator (academic achievement assessments administered during an initial or triennial assessment. Not only do the two scores corroborate the deficit areas, but they can provide vital information for programming and IEP goals formation).

• Related service providers as appropriate.

• Nurse (medical issues, including ADHD).

Form D/M 66 – Assessment Plan

Each meeting to develop, review, or revise the Individualized Education Program (IEP) for an individual with exceptional needs shall be conducted by an IEP team. Required IEP Team Members. The LEA must ensure that the IEP team for each child with a disability includes:

• The parents of the child.

• Not less than one general education teacher (if he/she is, or may be, participating in the general education environment).

• Not less than one special education teacher of the child, or where appropriate, not less than one special education provider of the child.

• A representative of the LEA qualified to provide, or supervise the provision of, specially designed instruction; is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum; and is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the LEA.

• An individual who can interpret the instructional implications of evaluation if applicable.

• At the discretion of the parent or the LEA, other individuals who have knowledge, or special expertise regarding the child,

http://dmselpa.org/resources/66.pdf


including related services personnel as appropriate.

• Whenever appropriate, the child with a

disability.

The LEA is also responsible for inviting a child with a disability to attend his/her IEP meeting if a purpose of the meeting will be the consideration of the postsecondary goals for the child and the transition services needed to assist the child in reaching those goals. To the extent appropriate, with the consent of the parents or an individual with exceptional needs who has reached the age of majority, the LEA shall invite a representative of a participating agency that is likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services. For initial IEP team meetings for a child who was previously served under Part C and is moving to Part B, an invitation to the initial IEP team meeting must, at the request of the parent, be sent to the Part C service coordinator or other representatives of the Part C system to assist with the smooth transition of services. See SELPA Policy Chapter 25, Appendix D – IEP Team Membership & Participation Questions & Answers IEP Team Attendance. A member of the IEP team is not required to attend an IEP team meeting, in whole or in part, if the parent of the child with a disability and the LEA agree, in writing, that the attendance of the member is not necessary because the member’s area of the curriculum or related services is not being modified or discussed at the meeting. Excusal from IEP Team Attendance. Required IEP team members may be excused from attending an IEP team meeting, in whole or in part, when the meeting involves a modification to or discussion of the member’s area of the curriculum or related services, if:

1. The parent, in writing, and the LEA consent to the excusal; AND

2. The member submits, in writing to the parent and the IEP team, input into the development of the IEP prior to the meeting.

Form D/M 64 - Excusal of IEP Team Member Parent/Guardian Attendance. If neither parent/guardian can attend the IEP team meeting, the LEA shall use other methods to ensure parent/guardian participation, including individual or conference telephone calls. The

parent/guardian and the LEA may agree to use alternative means of meeting participation. A meeting may be conducted without a parent/guardian in attendance if the LEA is unable to convince the parent/guardian that he/she should attend. In this case, the LEA is responsible for maintaining a record of its attempts to arrange a mutually agreed-upon time and place. Examples include:

1. Detailed records of telephone calls made or attempted and the results of those calls.

2. Copies of correspondence sent to the parent/guardian and any responses received.

3. Detailed records of visits made to the home or place of employment of the parent/guardian and the results of those visits.

The LEA must ensure that the parent/guardian is a member of any group that makes decisions on the educational placement of the student. IEP Team Responsibilities. The IEP team is responsible for reviewing the assessment results, determining eligibility, determining the content of the IEP, present levels, goals and services, and making program placement recommendations. In determining the program placement of a student, the LEA shall ensure that the placement decisions and the child’s placement are made in the least restrictive environment. Development of IEP. When developing each child’s IEP, the IEP team shall consider the following:

1. Child’s strengths.

2. Parent/guardian’s concerns for enhancing the education of the child.

3. Results of the initial assessment or the most recent assessment of the child.

4. Academic, developmental, and functional needs of the child.

Consideration of Special Factors:

1. In the case of a child whose behavior impedes his or her learning or that of others, consider the use of positive behavioral

http://www.dmselpa.org/resources/c4Ad.pdf




interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address the behavior.

2. In the case of a child with limited English proficiency, consider the language needs of the child as those needs relate to the child’s IEP.

3. In the case of a child who is blind or visually impaired, provide for instruction in Braille, and the use of Braille, unless the IEP team determines, after an assessment of the child’s reading and writing skills, needs, and appropriate reading and writing media, including an assessment of the child’s future needs for instruction in Braille or the use of Braille, that instruction in Braille or the use of Braille is not appropriate for the child.

4. Consider the communication needs of the child, and in the case of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the child’s language and communication needs, opportunities for direct communications with peers, and professional personnel in the child’s language and communication mode, academic level, and full range of needs, including opportunities for direct instruction in the child’s language and communication mode.

5. Consider whether the child requires assistive technology devices and services.

In considering the special factors above, if the IEP team determines that the child needs a particular device or service, including an intervention, accommodation, or other program modification, in order for the child to receive FAPE, the IEP team shall include a statement to that effect in the child’s IEP. Review and Revision of IEP. The IEP team shall review the child’s IEP periodically, but not less frequently than annually, to determine whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved, and revise the IEP, as appropriate, to address:

1. A lack of expected progress toward the annual goals and in the general education curriculum.

2. The results of any reassessment.

3. Information about the child provided to, or by, the parents/guardians.

4. The child’s anticipated needs.

5. Other relevant matter.

Rights of the Parent. The parent/guardian shall have the right to present information to the IEP team in person or through a representative and the right to participate in meetings, relating to the eligibility for special education and related services, recommendations, and program planning. IEP Team Meetings. California Education Code § 32210 states that “Any person who willfully disturbs any public school or any public school meeting is guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500).” Employees of the LEA must adhere to customary professional standards when providing services to and/or communicating with students, parents, or related service providers. It is the expectation of the LEA that all personnel will be responsive to parents’ concerns and attempt to resolve problems at the most appropriate level. In the event LEA personnel are unable to resolve the matter, it should be referred to the administrator or designee and, if necessary, subsequently to the superintendent or designee. It is neither required nor desired that an employee of the LEA, related service provider, student, or parent, face abusive language or behavior. The intent of the law is that the IEP team meeting be nonadversarial and focused on the child’s needs. SELPA Policy Chapter 4 - Instructional Planning & the IEP, Section A, Professional Conduct (Civility) IEP Meetings when Required. An IEP team must meet whenever any of the following occurs:

1. The child has received an initial formal assessment. The team may meet when a child receives any subsequent formal assessments.

2. The child demonstrates a lack of anticipated progress.

3. The parent/guardian or school staff member requests a meeting to develop, review, or revise the IEP.

4. At least annually, to review the child’s progress, the IEP, including whether the annual goals for the child are being achieved, and the appropriateness of placement, and to make any necessary revisions. The IEP team conducting the annual IEP for the child consists of those required IEP team members. Other individuals may participate in the annual

https://www.dmselpa.org/resources/c4.pdf

https://www.dmselpa.org/resources/c4.pdf


review if they possess expertise or knowledge essential for the review.

An IEP team meeting requested by the parent/guardian to review an IEP shall be held within 30 days, not counting days between the child’s regular school sessions, terms, or days of school vacation in excess of five school days, from the date of receipt of the parent/guardian’s written request. If a parent/guardian makes an oral request, the LEA shall notify the parent/guardian of the need for a written request and the procedures for filing a written request. Record IEP Meetings. The parent/guardian or LEA has the right to record electronically the proceedings of the IEP team meetings on an audiotape recorder. The parent/guardian or LEA shall notify the members of the IEP team of his/her or its intent to record a meeting at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. If the LEA initiates the notice of intent to audiotape record a meeting and the parent/guardian objects or refuses to attend the meeting because it will be tape recorded, the meeting shall not be recorded on an audiotape recorder. Under federal law, audiotape recordings made by the LEA are subject to the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 and are subject to the confidentiality requirements of the regulations under 34 CFR §§ 300.610 to 300.626, inclusive. The parent/guardian has the right (34 CFR §§ 99.10 to 99.22) to inspect and review the tape recordings and to request that the tape recording be amended if he/she believes that they contain information that is inaccurate, misleading, or in violation of the rights of privacy or other rights of the child. The parent/guardian has the right to challenge, in a hearing, information that he/she believes is inaccurate, misleading, or in violation of the individual’s rights of privacy or other rights. California law also states, Any person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or contrivance, or in any other manner, intentionally taps, or makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically, acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with any telegraph or telephone wire, line, cable, or instrument, including the wire, line, cable, or instrument of any internal telephonic communication system, or who willfully and without the consent of all parties to the communication, or in any unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message, report, or communication

while the same is in transit or passing over any wire, line, or cable, or is being sent from, or received at any place within this state; or who uses, or attempts to use, in any manner, or for any purpose, or to communicate in any way, any information so obtained, or who aids, agrees with, employs, or conspires with any person or persons to unlawfully do, or permit, or cause to be done any of the acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by both a fine and imprisonment in the county jail or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. If the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or Section 632, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, he or she is punishable by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170, or by both that fine and imprisonment. Legal References: 20 USC § 1232g; CA Ed Code § 56341.1(g); 34 CFR §§ 99, 300.560 – 300.575, 300.610 – 300.626; CA Penal Code § 632. Notice of IEP Meeting. The LEA shall take steps to ensure that no less than one of the parents/guardians of the child is present at each IEP team meeting or are afforded the opportunity to participate. The LEA shall notify the parent/guardian early enough (at least 10 days prior) to ensure an opportunity to attend. The IEP team meeting must be scheduled at a mutually agreed-upon time and place. The notice must contain the purpose, time, and location of the meeting and who shall be in attendance. The parent/guardian is also afforded the right to bring other people to the meeting who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child. The LEA must also inform the parents/guardian regarding the participation of the infants and toddlers with disabilities service coordinator at the initial IEP team meeting for a child previously served under Part C. Form D/M 67 - IEP Meeting Notice Assessment Timeline. An IEP team meeting required as a result of an assessment of a child must be scheduled within a total time not to exceed 60 days, not counting days between the child’s regular school sessions, terms, or days of school vacation in excess of five school days, from the date of receipt of the parent/guardian’s written consent for assessment, unless the parent/guardian agrees, in writing, to an extension. An IEP, however, required as a result of an assessment of a child must be developed within



30 days after the commencement of the subsequent regular school year as determined by the LEA’s school calendar for each child for whom a referral has been made 30 days or less prior to the end of the regular school year. A meeting to develop an IEP for a child shall be conducted within 30 days of a determination that the child needs special education and related services. The timeline for assessments consented to by a parent/guardian on an assessment plan offered by the LEA is 60 calendar days from the time the LEA receives the signed assessment plan. The parent/guardian may not amend the LEA proposed assessment plan. IEP Contents. The IEP is a legal document for each individual with exceptional needs that is developed, reviewed, and revised. The IEP includes the following:

1. A statement of the child’s areas of educational need, present levels of academic achievement and functional performance including:

(a) The manner in which the disability of the

child affects his/her involvement and progress in the general education curriculum.

(b) For preschool children, as appropriate, the manner in which the disability affects his/her participation in appropriate activities.

(c) For children with exceptional needs who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives.

2. A statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals, designed to do the following:

(a) Meet the needs of the child that result

from his/her disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum.

(b) Meet each of the other educational needs of the child that result from the disability of the child.

3. A description of the manner in which the progress of the child towards meeting the annual goals will be measured and when periodic reports on the progress the child is making towards meeting the annual goals, such as through quarterly or other periodic

reports, concurrent with the issuance of report cards, will be provided.

4. A statement of the special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable, to be provided to the child, or on behalf of the child, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel that will be provided to enable the child to do the following:

(a) To advance appropriately towards attaining the annual goals.

(b) To be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities.

(c) To be educated and participate with other individuals with exceptional needs and nondisabled individuals in activities.

5. An explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with nondisabled children in the regular class and in the activities described in #4.

6. A statement of individual appropriate accommodations that are necessary to measure the academic achievement and functional performance of the child on state and district-wide assessments.

7. If the IEP team determines that the child shall take an alternate assessment instead of a particular state or district-wide assessment of student achievement, a statement of the following:

(a) The reason why the child cannot participate in the regular assessment.

(b) The reason why the particular alternate assessment selected is appropriate for the child.

8. The projected date for the beginning of the services and modifications, and the anticipated frequency, location, and duration of those services and modifications.

9. Beginning not later than the first IEP to be in effect when the child is 16 years of age, or younger if determined appropriate by the IEP team, and updated annually thereafter, the following shall be included:

(a) Appropriate measurable postsecondary goals based upon age-appropriate transition assessments related to training, education, employment, and


where appropriate, independent living skills.

(b) The transition services, including courses of study, needed to assist the child in reaching those goals.

If appropriate, the IEP shall also include, but not be limited to all of the following:

1. For children in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, any alternative means and modes necessary for a child to complete the prescribed course of study of the LEA and to meet or exceed proficiency standards for graduation.

2. For children whose native language is other than English, linguistically appropriate goals, programs, and services.

3. Extended school year (ESY) services shall be included in the IEP and provided to the child if the IEP team of the child determines, on an individual basis, that the services are necessary for the provision of a FAPE.

4. Provision for the transition into the regular class program if the child is to be transferred from a special class or nonpublic, nonsectarian school into a regular class in a public school for any part of the school day, including the following:

(a) A description of activities provided to integrate the child into the general education program. The description shall indicate the nature of each activity, and the time spent on the activity each day or week.

(b) A description of the activities provided to support the transition of children from the special education program into the general education program.

5. For children with low incidence disabilities, specialized services, materials, and equipment, consistent with guidelines established pursuant to Section 56136.

Legal References: 20 USC 1414(d)(1)(B)-(d)(1)(D); 34 CFR §§ 99.10 – 99.22, 300.114 – 300.118, 300.322(c), 300.323(c)(2), 300.328, 300.610 – 300.626, 34 CCR § 300.321; CA Ed Code §§ 32210, 56341(a-i), 56341.1, 56341.2, 56341.5, 56343-44

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) is a federal law that protects the privacy of student education records. The law applies to all schools that receive funds under an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education. FERPA gives parents certain rights with respect to their children’s education records. These rights transfer to the child when he/she reaches the age of 18 (age of majority) or attends school beyond the high school level. Students to whom the rights have transferred are “eligible students.”

• Parents or eligible students have the right to inspect and review the student’s education records maintained by the school. Schools are not required to provide copies of records, unless, for reasons such as great distance, it is impossible for parents or eligible students to review records. Schools may charge a fee for copies of records.

• Parents or eligible students have the right to request that a school correct records that they believe to be inaccurate or misleading. If the school decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student then has the right to a formal hearing. After the hearing, if the school decides not to amend the record, the parent or eligible student has the right to place a statement with the record setting forth his/her view about the contested information.

• Generally, schools must have written permission from the parent or eligible student in order to release any information without consent. The following are exceptions:

School officials with legitimate educational interest.

Other schools to which a child is transferring.

Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes.

Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student.

Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school.

Accrediting organizations.

To comply with a judicial order or lawfully-issued subpoena.

Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies.


State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific state law.

The LEA may disclose, without consent, “directory” information such as a student’s name, address, telephone number, date, and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, the LEA must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them. The LEA must notify the parent and eligible students annually of their rights under FERPA. The actual means of notification is left to the discretion of each LEA. Prior consent is also not required to disclose information when the disclosure, subject to the requirements of 34 CFR § 99.34, to officials of another school, school system, or institution of postsecondary education where the student seeks or intends to enroll, or where the student is already enrolled so long as the disclosure is for purposes related to the student’s enrollment or transfer. 34 CFR § 99.34 states, Conditions applied to disclosure of information to other educational agencies or institutions (a) An educational agency or institution that discloses

an education record under 99.31(a)(2) shall: (1) Make reasonable attempts to notify the

parent or eligible student at the last known address of the parent or eligible student, unless: (i) The disclosure is initiated by the parent

or eligible student; or (ii) The annual notification of the agency or

institution under 99.7 includes a notice that the agency or institution forwards education records to other agencies or institutions that have requested the records and in which the student seeks or intends to enroll or is already enrolled so long as the disclosure is for purposes related to the student’s enrollment or transfer.

Audiotape Recordings by LEA Protected. Under federal law, audiotape recordings made by a LEA are subject to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974, and are subject to the confidentiality requirements of the regulations under 34 CFR §§ 300.610 to 300.626.

Legal References: 20 USC 1232g; 34 CFR §§ 99.10 – 99.22, 99.31(a)(2), 99.34; 34 CFR §§ 300.610 – 300.626

According to California Education Code § 49069, parents of currently enrolled or former students have an absolute right to access any and all student records related to their children that are maintained by school districts or private schools. The editing or withholding of any such records, except as provided under law, is prohibited. Each LEA should adopt procedures for granting a parent(s) copies of their child’s file or time to inspect and review them during regular school hours. Access to parents shall be provided no later than five business days following the date of the request. Procedures shall include the notification to the parent of the location of all official student records, if requested. Based on the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), access to student records and information shall not be denied to a parent because he or she is not the student’s custodial parent. Policies and Procedures. Student records are a necessary element in describing a child’s development in school. It is also essential for the records to be accurate, appropriate, and secure, in accordance with state and federal laws. Such policies and procedures must:

1. Guarantee access to authorized persons within five days of the written request.

2. Assure security of all confidential records.

3. Enumerate and describe student records collected and maintained.

4. Provide for the annual notification of right of access by parent/guardian or eligible student.

5. State that a nominal fee may be charged for copies of records.

6. Specify access restrictions, including criteria for disclosure to “school officials with legitimate educational interest.”

7. Provide for an access of disclosure log.

8. Provide the process for the correction or removal of information.


All individually identifiable information is confidential and covered by the rules of access. Essentially, all information about a student is confidential, and access is limited to those school employees with an “educational need to know” and the parent (or student over 18 years of age). Only the parent (or student over 18 years of age) may authorize the release of any information except under the specific and narrow set of circumstances. Thus, discussion of a specific student in a teacher’s lunchroom, in a manner that identifies the student, is a clear violation of that student’s right to privacy. Likewise, posted class lists or lists with student names and/or addresses are also confidential and governed by the same rules. Definitions. “Parent” means a natural parent, an adopted parent, or legal guardian. If the parents are divorced or legally separated, only a parent having legal custody of the child may challenge the content of a record pursuant to California Education Code § 49070, offer a written response to a record pursuant to § 49072, or consent to release records to others pursuant to § 49075. However, either parent may grant consent if both parents have notified, in writing, the school or LEA that an agreement has been made. If a child has attained the age of 18 years or is attending an institution of postsecondary education, the permission or consent required of, and the rights accorded to, the parents or guardian of the child shall thereafter only be required of, and accorded to, the child. Where the courts have assigned “joint custody,” both parents have full rights of access, consent, etc. If both parents have “joint legal custody” but one has physical custody, the custodial parent is the one whose signature is required for authorization. If both parents have joint physical custody, either parent can agree/consent and the dissenting parent would then have to seek a court order to stop the evaluation, placement, release of records, etc. Since the court may declare a child a ward of the court and place the child with the natural parents, the exact wording of the court order may be needed to determine who has custody. If a child has been referred to the court, but custody has not yet been determined, the parent(s) retains his/her rights and, except for an “emergency,” a court order (or parent consent) would be necessary in order to show the records to any person other than the parent. Student Records. Student records mean any item of information directly related to an identifiable student, other than directory information, that is maintained by the LEA or

required to be maintained by an employee in the performance of his or her duties whether recorded by handwriting, print, tapes, film, microfilm, or other means. Student records shall not include informal notes related to a student compiled by a school officer or employee which remain in the sole possession of the maker and are not accessible or revealed to any other person, except a substitute. E-mails. The Family Right to Privacy Act (FERPA) defines education records as records, files, documents, and other materials that: (1) contain information directly related to a student, and (2) are maintained by an educational agency or institution or by a person acting for such agency or institution. Under FERPA, a record is any information recorded in any form, including, but not limited to, handwriting, print, computer media, video or audio tape, film, microfilm, and microfiche. E-mail communications that both (1) contain personally identifiable information directly related to the student and (2) is maintained by the LEA, qualify as a student record. An e-mail must satisfy the above two prongs as defined in IDEA and 34 CFR 99.3. If the LEA prints a hardcopy of the e-mail and places it in the student’s permanent file then it is a student record. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California (53 IDELR 143) recently held that an e-mail is not an education record subject to the relevant provisions of the Education Code or the FERPA, unless it contains information related to the student and is “maintained” by the agency. The District Court noted that nothing in FERPA “requires an LEA to maintain an e-mail or any other record based solely on the fact that it contains personally identifiable information about a student.” The Court observed that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that the word “maintain,” as used in FERPA, “suggests FERPA records will be kept in a filing cabinet in a records room at the school or on a permanent secure database.” Under this guidance, the notes kept by teachers or nonpublic agency staff members on a student’s behavior would not fall under the category of being maintained. This case is a case of first impression on this topic, and federal district court decisions, while persuasive, are not binding authority upon other federal district courts or the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.


Access. A personal inspection and review of a record or an accurate copy of a record; an oral description or communication of a record or an accurate copy of such a record, and a request to release a copy of any record. Custodian of Records. An administrator (custodian of records) is responsible for the security of student records maintained by the LEA and shall devise procedures for assuring that access to such records is limited to authorized persons. The task of the custodian of records is to:

1. Ensure that records are properly assembled, dated, signed, and maintained.

2. Maintain the student access log.

3. Classify records as to:

a. Mandatory Permanent

b. Mandatory Interim, or

c. Permitted

4. Ensure the proper release and/or transfer of

student records.

5. Receive and process parental requests for access or challenge to the record.

6. Supervise the proper destruction of the records where appropriate.

Some of the responsibilities above may be delegated to appropriate certificated personnel. Classification, Maintenance, and the Destruction of Records. All school records in California are divided into three groups for the purpose of defining how long records are kept before they are destroyed.

1. Class I Mandatory Permanent Records: must be kept in perpetuity.

2. Class II Mandatory Interim Records: records that school districts are required to compile and maintain for stipulated periods of time and are then destroyed as per state law. Unless these interim records are forwarded to another district, they may be officially determined to be disposable when the student leaves the district or when their usefulness ceases.

3. Class III Disposable: records that are kept only as long as they are considered useful. Class III records are to be destroyed by “foolproof methods” so as to maintain the confidentiality of the record. Whenever

records are deemed Class III, parents are to be notified in writing.

While Class III records may be destroyed after the third school year following the point at which usefulness has ceased, the San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools (SBCSS) Policy and the Participation Agreement of the Local Plan requires maintenance of special education records and accounts including property, personal, and financial records for five years after their usefulness ceases. Such records, as related to special education may include: special education forms, access log, health records, special education test protocols, assessment reports, and authorizations. Personal Notes. Personal notes that remain the sole possession of the maker and which are not accessible to any other person do not constitute part of a student’s record. However, the moment any of these notes (sometimes called “personal memory aids”) are shared with another, they become part of the student’s record (Permitted Student Records) and all procedures for access, storage, and/or destruction apply. Informal notes are subject to subpoena if they are the basis for any evidence in a hearing or court. Storage. All student records must be kept in a safe, secure manner so as to maintain the confidentiality of that information. Locked file cabinets are the preferred method. FERPA requires LEAs to use “reasonable methods” to ensure teachers and other school officials obtain access to only those education records in which they have a legitimate educational interest. It is the responsibility of the custodian of records to ensure that only those with proper access rights are allowed to use or review the records. Records for each individual student shall be maintained in a central file at the school attended by the student or if records are maintained in different locations, a notation in the central file as to where such other records may be found is required. FERPA does not generally address what education records a school may or may not maintain or where the school maintains such records. Thus, under FERPA a school would not be prohibited from placing a notice in the student’s cumulative records that states that the student receives special education services and that another file exists in another office. Purging IQ Information from Student Records. According to Judge Peckham’s 1986 decision in Larry P. regarding the prohibition of


IQ testing of African-American students, IQ scores from any other source cannot become part of the student’s records. The California Department of Education (CDE) issued a directive (Campbell, 1987) on how to dispose of Larry P. records generated prior to September, 1986. Before an African-American student that is receiving special education services is reevaluated for special education or transfers to a new LEA, all prior records of IQ scores, or references to information from IQ tests, should be permanently sealed. The records are to be opened only for litigation purposes, official state or federal audits, or upon parent request. The parent shall be given copies of the sealed records upon request. The sealed records shall be maintained for a period of five years. Prior to sealing the records of these students, the parents shall be notified that the records will be sealed because of a court decision that prohibits the use of intelligence tests for African-American students for any purpose related to special education. Additionally, prior to sealing the records, a qualified professional should identify appropriate data to be copied and purged of all IQ scores or references to information from IQ tests. The remaining data should then be transferred to the student’s current record. In no case shall the IQ test information be made available to the IEP team for any purpose. Since the prohibition from using IQ tests with African-American students applies only to LEAs in California, it is often the case that records of African-American students received from out-of-state LEAs and/or from other agencies may contain IQ test information. Therefore, under these circumstances, the SELPA recommends that LEAs take the following steps to purge IQ information from a student record:

• Review the case file to determine if prohibited information is contained therein, removing any prohibited protocols and all assessment reports that contain IQ information.

• Copy the original report(s) and on the copy, extricate the following information:

1. Any reference to a test instrument which yields an IQ score or standard score that is an indication of cognitive functioning.

2. Any test data summary scores from the test instrument(s).

3. Any commentary in the report that discusses the student’s performance on the test instrument(s).

• Make a copy of the purged report to place in the student’s record and destroy the copy that was used to extricate the information.

• Notify the parent/guardian that the student’s original report and any relevant protocols will be sealed.

• Seal the purged records and a copy of the parent/guardian notification in an envelope. Mark the outside of the envelope with the student’s name, destruction date of five years from the date the records were purged, and instructions that the envelope is only to be opened for purposes of litigation, official state or federal audits, or upon parent/guardian request.

Add the student’s name to the LEA’s master list of student records from which reports have been purged based upon the Larry P. ruling. Transfer of Records. Whenever a child transfers from one LEA to another or to a private school, or transfers from a private school to an LEA within California, the child’s permanent record or copy shall be transferred by the former LEA or private school upon request of the LEA or private school were the child intends to enroll. Any LEA requesting a transfer of records shall notify the parent/guardian of his/her right to receive a copy of the record and a right to a hearing to challenge the content of the record.

1. Mandatory Permanent Student Records: When a child transfers to another program/school/ LEA (public or private), the program administrator shall transfer the child’s Mandatory Permanent Record or copy thereof, upon request by the LEA or private school where the child intends to enroll. The transfer date and the destination of the student record shall be recorded on the LEA’s copy of the Mandatory Permanent Record, which must be kept in perpetuity.

2. Transfer of Special Education Records: Upon receipt of a request by an educational agency when a child with a disability has enrolled, the former educational agency shall send the child’s special education records or a copy thereof within five working days.

3. Mandatory Interim Records: Mandatory

Interim Records must be forwarded to California public schools and may be forwarded to other schools when the child transfers. If not forwarded, and if not


reclassified, they will be reclassified (Class III).

4. Special Education Records: Because LEAs frequently have treated special education records as if they were different from cumulative records, separate consideration for such records is warranted. Simply stated, special education records are subject to the same privacy and access rights as other Mandatory Interim Student Records. Even though records from physicians may be stamped “confidential” or a psychologist’s report contains sensitive or potentially upsetting information, the parent or eligible student has full rights of access. Of equal importance is the LEA’s obligation to retain all records required for admission to a special education class or program. Not only are they necessary for audit, but may be necessary to explain/interpret IEP team actions or IEPs.

As Mandatory Interim Student Records, special education records may be classified as Class III Disposable, when they are deemed as no longer useful. This could occur only after transfer or withdrawal from a special education program. Even after classified as disposable, Mandatory Interim Records must be retained at least three years beyond the date of the record’s creation.

Procedures Pertaining to Access to Student Records. Parents have an absolute right to access student records pertaining to their children. The program administrator of the program to which a child is being enrolled shall notify a parent of this and other rights pertaining to student records upon the date of the student’s initial enrollment, and thereafter on an annual basis. The program administrator shall grant parents access to inspect and review records related to their children during regular school hours and no later than five business days following the date of the written request.

1. The program administrator or psychologist will review the record with the parent and the program administrator shall be responsible for ensuring that qualified certificated personnel are present to interpret records, if requested.

2. Whenever any known information that is part of a student’s record is not available to the parent at the time of his/her inspection

and review, the program administrator shall notify the parent of the location of the information and the reason why the information was unavailable.

3. The program administrator shall maintain a log for each student’s record that lists all persons or organizations requesting or receiving information from the record (except parents, students, school officials/employees with a legitimate educational interest) and the reason for the request. No information shall be released to any person or organization, except certificated school personnel with a legitimate educational interest without prior written consent of the parent.

4. The log shall be open to inspection only to a parent and the school official or his/her designee responsible for the maintenance of student records.

5. Whenever a parent requests a copy of any student record, the LEA may make a reasonable charge in an amount not to exceed the actual cost of furnishing copies, however, no charge shall be made for furnishing:

• Up to two transcripts of former student’s records, or

• Up to two verifications of various records of former students.

Categories of Access. State and federal laws permit access to records according to the following categories listed below. Those granted access are prohibited from releasing information to another person or agency without written permission from the parent/guardian. A child, age 18 or older, has the right of consent. Mandatory Access. The following persons or agencies with a legitimate educational interest shall have access to student records:

1. Natural parents, adoptive parents, or legal guardians of students younger than age 18 (within five days of request).

2. School officials and employees with a legitimate educational interest.

3. School attendance and review board members.

4. *Other public schools (California) where student has enrolled or intends to enroll.

5. Federal, state, and county officials for program audit or compliance.


6. Natural parents or adoptive parents of dependent students who are 18 or older (within five days of request).

7. Students who are either 16 or have completed the tenth grade.

8. Those so authorized in compliance with a court order.

9. Private schools or out-of-state schools of anticipated or new enrollment (Mandatory Permanent Student Records only/Special Education Records).

Permitted Access. The following persons or agencies may have access:

1. Appropriate persons in an emergency when the health or safety of a student or other person is threatened.

2. Agencies or organizations in connection with students applying for financial aid.

3. Accrediting associations.

4. Organizations conducting studies on behalf of the LEA.

5. *Private schools or out-of-state schools (Mandatory Interim and Permitted Student Records only).

6. Those persons or agencies who have written authorization by parent/guardian with custody or student age 18 or older.

*LEA requesting record must notify the parent/guardian of their right to receive a copy of the record and the right to a hearing to challenge the content of the record. Prohibited Access. No access to student records shall be permitted to any other person with written parental permission or under judicial order. Such permission must:

1. State the nature of the information to be released, and

2. State the purpose for which the information is released.

In addition, the recipient must be informed of, but need not acknowledge in writing, restrictions upon further release to another agency, person, persons, or organization without specific written authorization. However, this paragraph shall not be construed as to require prior parental consent when information within the educational institution, agency, or organization obtaining access, so long as such persons have an equal legitimate interest in the information.

When the custodian of records furnishes information in compliance with a court order, he/she should notify the parent and student in advance of the compliance, if lawfully possible, within the requirements of the judicial order. Rights of Parents to Challenge the Student Record(s). Following an inspection and review of his/her student records, the parent of a student may challenge the content of any student record, which he/she alleges to be:

1. Inaccurate.

2. An unsubstantiated personal conclusion or inference.

3. A conclusion or inference outside the observer’s area of competence.

4. Not based on the personal observation of a named person with the time and place of the observation noted.

5. Misleading.

6. In violation of the privacy or rights of the student.

Procedure for challenging the content(s) of a student record:

1. Should the parent/guardian elect to challenge any student record, he/she shall file a written request with the superintendent, or his/her designee, to correct or remove any information recorded in the written records concerning his/her child.

2. Within 30 days of receipt of such request, the superintendent, or his/her designee, shall meet with the parent/guardian and the certificated employee who recorded the information in question, if any, and if such employee is presently employed by the LEA. The superintendent shall then sustain or deny the allegations.

If the superintendent sustains any or all of the allegations, he/she shall order the correction or the removal and destruction of the information. If the superintendent denies any or all of the allegations and refuses to order the correction or the removal of the information, the parent/guardian may, within 30 days of the refusal, appeal the decision in writing to the governing board of the LEA.

3. Within 30 days of receipt of an appeal, the governing board shall, in closed session with the parent/guardian and the certificated


employee who recorded the information in question, if any, and if the employee is presently employed by the LEA, determine whether or not to sustain or deny the allegations.

4. If the governing board sustains any or all of the allegations, it shall order the superintendent to immediately correct or remove and destroy the information from the written records of the student, and so inform the parent/guardian in writing.

Legal References: CA Ed Code §§ 49061, 49062, 49063, 49064, 49065, 49068, 49069, 49070, 49071, 49072, 49073, 49075, 49076, and 49077; FERPA; 5 CCR §§ 430 – 438, 16027; 20 USC § 1232(g); SELPA Policy Chapter 15 - Student Records

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) entitles children with disabilities to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment. Parents and school officials sometime disagree on what special education services and placement a child should receive under this right. Recognizing the potential for disputes, the IDEA provides several dispute resolution mechanisms to help parents and school officials resolve differences of opinion. This section describes two of these dispute resolution mechanisms: Resolution and Mediation sessions. Resolution Sessions. A resolution session is a face-to-face meeting between parent(s) and LEA officials following the filing of a due process complaint. The resolution session is designed to give the parties the opportunity to settle the case before a due process hearing. Unlike mediation, which is voluntary, resolution sessions are required by the IDEA. IDEA requires the LEA to convene a resolution session within 15 days of filing a due process complaint. Relevant members of the IEP team must be present, i.e., those who have knowledge of the issues raised in the due process complaint, as well as someone who has decision-making authority, i.e., someone who has authority to legally bind the LEA. Parents also must be present.

If the parent refuses to participate, the LEA may ask the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) to dismiss the parent’s due process complaint or request an extension of the time period allowed for due process. A dismissal in these circumstances, however, would not prevent the parent from filing a new petition on the same grounds, as long as the statute of limitations has not run out on the issue. At the resolution session, the parent must present the basis for the due process complaint and the facts that support the complaint. This presentation gives the LEA personnel the opportunity to understand the issues more fully and resolve the complaint without going to due process. Like mediation agreements, if a settlement agreement is reached during a resolution session, it must be memorialized in writing and is enforceable in court. The agreement is not final until three business days after it is signed, because either side can rescind it. When should a parent participate in a resolution session? A parent must participate in a resolution session if the parent filed a due process complaint and the LEA will not agree to waive the session. A parent should participate when the resolution session will involve higher-level personnel that have not been involved to date. These new participants might bring a different understanding to the issue or have more settlement authority. Even if a parent feels fairly certain that no resolution will be reached, the discussions at the resolution session inevitably give both parties a better sense of the issues listed in the complaint. A parent who has been assisted by an advocate or attorney may have developed a clearer understanding of the case since the dispute arose and may be helpful in articulating the grounds for the complaint. This may result in a resolution where previous conversations had failed. A parent may want to waive the resolution session, however, if the LEA opposes the waiver, the parent must participate or risk having the due process petition dismissed or delayed. Mediation. Special education mediation is a process in which a mediator helps to resolve a dispute between a parent and LEA personnel over a child’s special education program. A mediator is a neutral person who will help the participants arrive at a mutually satisfactory agreement. The mediator is employed by the

http://www.dmselpa.org/resources/c15.pdf

http://www.dmselpa.org/resources/c15.pdf


Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), so there is no cost to either the LEA or the parents. Parents may request mediation from a LEA at any time to attempt to resolve a dispute. Typically, mediation may be requested prior to the filing of a due process petition, but it will be scheduled following the filing of a due process. The OAH is required to establish and implement procedures for mediation. The OAH schedules the mediation at a convenient time and place and the mediator facilitates the discussion. Although mediators vary in the way they handle sessions, participants can expect the mediator to help the parties make introductions, define the issues, present their points of view, explore options, and come to an agreement. More specifically, the mediator should:

• Help the parents and school officials state their positions clearly and productively.

• Help the parents and school officials stay focused on the relevant issues.

• Provide a neutral assessment of the strength of each side’s position.

• Separate the parents from the school personnel, if necessary or useful, and become their go-between for communication.

• Identify areas of agreement and disagreement.

• Suggest possibilities to each side that might bring them closer to agreement.

• Facilitate the drafting of a mediation agreement that resolves the dispute, if the parents and school officials have come to an agreement.

Legal Requirements for Mediation. IDEA requires that state departments of education offer LEAs and parents the opportunity to participate in mediation to settle any disagreements between them. IDEA requires state departments to:

• Maintain a list of qualified mediators who are knowledgeable about special education law and trained in mediation techniques.

• Compensate the mediators, so that the process is free to both parents and LEAs.

• Establish and implement procedures for facilitating mediation.

The law also requires that mediation be voluntary on both sides. So, if a parent requests mediation, but the LEA objects to it, then it will not be scheduled. Mediation must not delay a parents’ right to go forward with due process if that is what the parent chooses to do, but asking for and engaging in mediation will not delay the expiration of the statute of limitations for filing due process, which is two years. In other words, the clock for the two-year period of time (or other state time limits) in which parents can file due process continues to run during any mediation. What participants discuss in the mediation session is confidential and inadmissible as evidence in a later due process hearing or civil court – unless it was also spoken in another context where confidentiality did not apply. This might be in an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting, an informal conversation, or in written correspondence. If the mediation results in a verbal agreement, then that agreement must be put in writing and signed by the parents and a representative of the LEA. An agreement reached through mediation is enforceable in court. This means that neither the parent nor the LEA must go through an administrative due process hearing to have the terms enforced if there is a breach of the agreement. If the parties reach a successful resolution, due process will be avoided. This generally is desirable, because due process is more adversarial, costly, emotionally draining, time consuming, formal, and risky. Parents might request mediation because they are committed to mending damaged relationships, but feel the need for a third party to help. The parents may believe that they and LEA personnel can come to an agreement that will benefit the child by talking through the issue outside the formal structure of an IEP meeting and with the help of a mediator. Often, new LEA personnel will become involved in the decision-making process and open up new possibilities. Mediation can be useful even if parents are committed to choosing due process, because it can narrow the issues of disagreement and allow the parents to gain a better understanding of the LEA’s position. This will help parents prepare their case if due process occurs. Legal References: 20 U.S.C. 1415(e), 1415(f)(1)(B), 1415(b)(7), 1415(c)(2); 34 CFR 300.506, 300.507, 300.508, 300.510, 300.511, 300.512); CA Ed Code §§ 56501, 56501.5, 56502, 56503, 56505, and 56506


APPENDIX A SELPA Referral Procedures

The referral procedures was developed by the California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions (CAHELP), a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), to assist participating local education agencies (LEAs) in the Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area and the Desert/Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (hereinafter referred to as the SELPA) referral processes for special education and related services and behavioral health programs. NOTE: All services may not be available in all areas. Please check with the Program Specialist assigned to your LEA with any questions regarding the referral process.

Assistive Technology refers to a device or services that can be used as a tool by students with disabilities to achieve or maintain function. The IDEA and California law require that Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams consider whether students need assistive technology devices or services when developing IEPs. Assistive Technology (AT) relates to the tools required to maintain, improve, or increase functional capabilities to bridge the gap between student’s performance and the demands of the curriculum. AT devices and services are defined in the IDEA as:

• Any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability.

• Any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an AT device. This includes evaluation; providing for the acquisition of AT equipment; selecting, designing, interventions or services with AT devices; and training or technical assistance for the child, family, and other professionals who work with the child.

Low incidence disability is defined in California Education Code § 56026.5 as a severe disabling condition with an expected incidence rate of less than one percent of the total statewide enrollment in kindergarten through grade 12. For purposes of this definition, severe disabling conditions are hearing impairments, vision impairments, and severe

orthopedic impairments, or any combination thereof. For purposes of this definition, vision impairments do not include disabilities within the function of vision specified in Section 56338. Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for an Assistive Technology (AT) Assessment.

2. Complete the Assistive Technology Assessment Referral form (D/M 127) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.

3. Complete the Assessment Plan form (D/M 66) and obtain the parent/guardian signature.

• The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested.

• The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the Parental Authorization section of form D/M 66.

4. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name, if known. If not, leave the field blank.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Assistive Technology Program Specialist, at the SELPA. D/M 127 Assistive Technology

Assessment Referral form

D/M 66 Assessment Plan form

D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an Assistive Technology Assessment

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for an Assistive Technology Assessment

Any additional supporting information

http://dmselpa.org/resources/1/forms/127.pdf







Timelines for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA will assign the assessment to an independent assessor who will coordinate the assessment through the contact person named on the referral form (D/M 127). Timelines for Services. Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the agency that conducted the assessment or the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not AT services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. For students with a documented low incidence disability:

• IEP team must note the need for the low incidence equipment on the student’s IEP, and link one or more of the student’s annual goals to the use of that specialized equipment.

• Complete SELPA Low Incidence Pre-Approval/Reimbursement Request form (D/M 86). Director of special education must sign form D/M 86 before the packet is submitted to the SELPA.

• Submit the completed form D/M 86 signed by the director of special education with a copy of the current IEP documenting the student’s disability and goal for use of low incidence equipment to the Accounting Technician, SELPA Business Office.

Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the

team’s decision to refer the student for an Assistive Technology (AT) Assessment.



4. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested. Write Assistive Technology assessment on the line for “other.”

5. The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the Parental Authorization section of form D/M 66.


Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA.

D/M 127 Assistive Technology

Assessment Referral form



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an Assistive Technology Assessment

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for an Assistive Technology Assessment


Timelines for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA will determine whether to conduct the assessment using a multi-disciplinary team approach or assign the assessment to an independent assessor who will


http://dmselpa.org/resources/86A.pdf









coordinate the assessment through the contact person named on the referral form (D/M 127). All assessments must be completed within 60 days. Timelines for Services. Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the consultant or agency that conducted the assessment or the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not AT services or devices/equipment are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes or under the IEP Consideration of Special Factors form (D/M 68D page one) and/or in the Supplementary Aids and Supports form (D/M 68D page two).

The SELPA Audiological Program provides students with audiological assessment and services that will assist them in making the best use of their hearing and help them participate and progress in the general education curriculum. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for an Audiological Assessment.

2. Complete the Initial Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form (D/M 108) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.


4. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested.

5. The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the

Parental Authorization section of form D/M 66.

6. LEAs are encouraged to have assessment plans signed close to the date of their LEA audiology evaluation date and within the required time frame.

7. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name as the SELPA/Pacific Hearing Services. The disclosing agency will vary depending on whether it is a physician, medical center, or audiologist.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA. D/M 108 Initial Request for Audiological

Evaluations/Services form



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an audiological assessment

LEA’s hearing screening form that documents a minimum of two repeated failures on threshold tests or previous audiological assessment reports and/or audiograms for students who have an identified hearing loss

Timeline for Assessment. The audiological assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped. An Audiology Assessment Calendar is published on an annual basis at the beginning of each school year. The calendar lists the assessment dates and referral due dates for each LEA within the SELPA. The calendar can be found on the SELPA website at www.dmselpa.org. For students who require services outside of the regularly scheduled LEA visit, services may be coordinated between the SELPA and the LEA. Arrangements may be made for students to be served at the school site, at a nearby LEA, the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC), or at









the service provider’s office, whichever is available and appropriate. Please contact the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA for assistance. Timeline for Services. Upon completion of the audiological assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the agency that conducted the assessment or by the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA.

• The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the findings and recommendations of the assessment, consider the educational impact, and determine whether or not audiological services are needed.

• If ongoing audiological follow-up is recommended, code 720 should be listed under the Special Education and Related Services section of the IEP form.

• If it is decided that classroom amplification equipment is needed and the student agrees to wear it, a request for a proposal of the specific equipment should be made to the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA.

• If a profound hearing loss has been found, the deaf disability code (020) should be listed under the Eligibility section of the IEP form.

• If a mild to severe hearing loss has been found, the hard of hearing disability code (030) should be listed under the Eligibility section of the IEP form.

• If the disability is due to a hearing loss, the Low Incidence Disability box on the IEP form should be checked.

• If the hearing loss is not the primary disability, it may be listed as the secondary disability.

• If recommended and agreed upon, classroom amplification equipment should also be noted under Assistive Technology on the IEP form (D/M 68D).

• If the student is to receive amplification equipment for the first time, goals should be included for mastering equipment utilization, care, and operation.

Students who have previously been referred and evaluated for audiological services are eligible for annual audiological assessments. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

1. Complete the Annual Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form (D/M 108A). Please DO NOT complete the Initial Request for Audiological Evaluation/Services form (D/M 108) for annual referrals.

• Include information that is related to the school of attendance, program placement, and services the student is currently receiving.

• Include behavior and/or academic successes or challenges.

• Include information regarding the use and functioning of equipment such as hearing aids and/or FM systems.

• Include medical information related to the student’s hearing.

2. Complete the Assessment Plan form

(D/M 66) and obtain the parent/guardian signature.

• The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested. Most often the “other” box is checked followed by the statement, “Audiological assessment to be completed by SELPA(s) contracted audiologist.”


• LEAs are encouraged to have the assessment plans signed close to the date of their LEA audiology evaluation date and within the required time frame.

3. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form





(D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name as the SELPA/Pacific Hearing Services. The disclosing agency will vary depending on whether it is a physician, medical center, or audiologist.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA.

D/M 108A Annual Request for

Audiological Evaluations/Services form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form


Timeline for Assessment. The audiological assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped. An Audiology Assessment Calendar is published on an annual basis at the beginning of each school year. The calendar lists the assessment dates and referral due dates for each LEA within the SELPA. The calendar may be found on the SELPA website at www.dmselpa.org. For students who require services outside of the regularly scheduled LEA visit, services may be coordinated between the SELPA and the LEA. Arrangements may be made for students to be served at the school site, at a nearby LEA, the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) or at the service provider’s office, whichever is available and appropriate. Please contact the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA for assistance.

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) provides individual, group, and family counseling services for children and youth ages seven to 22. The DMCC accepts Medi-Cal, IEHP, TriCare, Pacific Care, Molina, and cash on a sliding scale for services provided. The goal of the DMCC is to assist clients in developing skills to reach their full potential. Referrals may be made through the child’s school, parents, physicians, and/or guardians. The DMCC provides School-Aged Treatment Services (SATS) medication support and

management upon referral from the treating therapist to the DMCC medical doctor. SATS are primarily provided at each child’s school, but are also offered in the home, clinic, and community as needed. The DMCC also provides Screening, Assessment, Referral, and Treatment (SART) for children birth to six years old as well as Therapeutic Behavioral Services (TBS), and/or Children’s Intensive Services (CIS). For more information, please contact the DMCC. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

Complete the Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) with as much detail as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility For the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment. Upon receipt of the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter (up to three times) to schedule the assessment intake meeting. An intervention specialist or behavioral health counselor will be assigned to conduct the assessment. If no response from the parent/guardian is received by the third letter, the referral will be closed. Timeline for Services

• If services are not deemed appropriate, the referral will be closed.

• If services are deemed appropriate, a clinician will be assigned and services will begin.

• The DMCC provides a monthly report to the directors of special education. The report includes a list of students who are currently served by the DMCC as well as an update for each referral that is in process.

The Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment (SART) program utilizes a team of highly qualified professionals to screen, assess, refer, and treat a child. San Bernardino County has collaboratively developed a program designed for children birth to six years of age who may have been prenatally exposed to drugs, alcohol, and/or violence. The






http://www.dmchildrenscenter.org/resources/DMCCForm100A_rev0714.pdf




SART program also addresses concerns with children experiencing behavior problems and difficulties maintaining appropriate behaviors in pre-school settings and the child’s home. The SART program offers a comprehensive screening process, assessment, and appropriate referrals to excellence treatment to improve overall functioning of the child. The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) provides medication support and management upon referral from the treating therapist in the DMCC medical doctor. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

Complete the SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B) with as much detail as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the completed SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment. Upon receipt of the completed SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter and send the Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social Emotional in order to gather more information regarding the parent/guardian’s concerns. A DMCC Clinical Nurse will be assigned to contact the parent/guardian and provide case management throughout the assessment process. Timeline for Services

If services are not deemed appropriate, the referral will be closed.

If services are deemed appropriate, a clinician will be assigned and services will begin.

The DMCC provides a monthly report to the directors of special education. The report includes a list of students who are currently served by the DMCC as well as an update for each referral that is in process.

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) Student Assistance Program (SAP) serves students, their families, and the school community. Students who are dealing with

non-academic barriers to learning are the primary target for SAP services. Students are referred by staff, parents, or concerned others to the program. Students may also self-refer. The purpose of SAP is to:

• To reduce the risk factors, barriers, and stressors of kids, youth, and their families.

• To provide appropriate strategies, interventions, and activities to school staff and families that increase their knowledge of social emotional, and behavioral issues.

• To increase student awareness of the issues they face daily, including the social emotional choices that impact their lives.

• To build protective supports for students and their families that include significant connections to others, training, and education.

Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Complete the SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) with as much detail as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator. Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility For the completed SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment. Upon receipt of the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter (up to three times) to schedule the assessment intake meeting. An intervention specialist or behavioral health counselor will be assigned to conduct the assessment. If no response from the parent/guardian is received by the third letter, the referral will be closed. Timeline for Services

• If services are not deemed appropriate, the referral will be closed.

• If services are deemed appropriate, a clinician will be assigned and services will begin.

• The DMCC provides a monthly report to the directors of special education. The report includes a list of students who are currently served by the DMCC as well as an update for each referral that is in process.

http://www.dmchildrenscenter.org/resources/DMCCForm100B_rev0714.pdf







Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a behavioral intervention assessment.

2. Complete the Assessment Plan form (D/M 66) and mark the appropriate boxes that correspond to observations/interviews, review of any recent assessment and “other” indicating “Functional Behavioral Assessment.”

3. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) upon receipt of the signed Assessment Plan form (D/M 66), and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the agency’s name, if known. If not, leave the field blank.


5. It is important to remind the parent/guardian to return forms D/M 66 and D/M 63 to the LEA on the date that it is signed or as soon as possible thereafter.

6. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped or return date written at the bottom of form D/M 66.

7. The LEA identifies the Nonpublic Agency (NPA) assessor to complete the assessment within the 60 day timeline.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed and signed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

Cover letter requesting a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) (Note: the director and the NPA determine the maximum number of hours needed to conduct assessment). Please indicate which NPA the LEA is selecting to complete the FBA.



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for a behavioral intervention assessment

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for a behavioral intervention assessment

Other assessments (private evaluations, Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical Therapy (PT), etc.)

Behavior plans (original and revised versions)

Incident reports

Discipline reports/log

Timeline for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA(s) will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to conduct the assessment. The ISA will be circulated for required signatures by the SELPA and the NPA provider. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to conduct the assessment. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. Upon completion of the assessment, the NPA will send the written report to the director of special education for the LEA and the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not behavioral intervention supports/services are warranted. The IEP meeting will be scheduled within the 60 day timeline. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the goals and services will be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the service code number 535 for behavioral intervention services and/or supervision, the class number for each service, provider code for the NPA






(400), projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an ISA and forward it to the appropriate NPA for signature who will then initiate services.


1. Convene an Individual Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for behavioral intervention supports.


Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

Cover letter requesting the addition of Nonpublic Agency (NPA) behavioral intervention supports and the name of the selected NPA


IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for behavioral intervention supports that includes the NPA on the service line with a start date

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for behavioral intervention supports

Other assessments (private evaluations)

Behavior plans (original and revised versions)

Incident reports

Discipline reports/log

Timeline for Assessment. An assessment is not required. Timeline for Services. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to begin services. The ISA will be forwarded to the appropriate NPA for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to initiate services. The NPA will not begin services until the agency has a signed ISA for the student.

Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a behavioral intervention assessment.












Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed and signed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

Cover letter requesting a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) (Note: the director and the NPA determine the maximum number of hours needed to conduct assessment). Please indicate which NPA the LEA is selecting to complete the FBA.



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for a behavioral intervention assessment and behavioral intervention supports

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for a behavioral intervention assessment and behavioral intervention supports

Other assessments (private evaluations, Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical Therapy (PT), etc.)

Incident reports

Discipline reports

Timeline for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to conduct the assessment. The SELPA will forward the ISA to the appropriate NPA for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to conduct the assessment. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. Timeline for Services. Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the NPA that conducted the assessment or the Program

Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not behavioral intervention supports services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the services should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the NPA, projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an ISA and forward it to the appropriate NPA for signature who will then determine initiation of services.

Nonpublic schools (NPS) provide educational settings and services to students who meet the eligibility criteria for special education and are experiencing behavior difficulties that are too significant to be accommodated within a public school environment. Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a change of placement to a NPS setting.

2. Complete the Nonpublic School Placement Referral form (D/M 134) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education. Specify the team’s preference for a specific NPS, if applicable.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA.





D/M 134 Nonpublic School Placement Referral form

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for NPS placement (Annual and Triennial IEP needs to be current)

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for NPS placement

If the last triennial was completed with a Triennial Assessment Determination form (D/M 119), include the last full psycho-educational report

Any additional information

Timeline for Services. Within ten (10) business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will review the packet for completion and forward it to the LEA’s NPS of choice. The NPS will contact the parent and placement will be made within 10 business days. The NPS will work directly with the LEA to schedule an IEP within thirty (30) days of the student’s placement at the school. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop a Master Contract with the NPS if one does not currently exist and an Individual Service Agreement (ISA). The ISA will be forwarded to the appropriate NPS for signature. The SELPA will enter the NPS placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database. Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Complete the Transfer into LEA form (D/M 52) and obtain the parent/guardian signature.

2. Complete the Nonpublic School Placement Referral form (D/M 134) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education. Specify the team’s preference for a specific Nonpublic School (NPS), if applicable.

3. Juvenile Hall/Nonpublic School Students - If the student’s last placement was a local NPS prior to being moved to a juvenile detention center, only complete form D/M 134 upon the student’s return to the LEA in lieu of preparing a new transfer packet.


D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form

D/M 134 Nonpublic School Placement Referral form

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for NPS placement that documents the previous NPS placement

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for NPS placement

If the last triennial was completed with a Triennial Assessment Determination form (D/M 119), include the last full psycho-educational report

Any additional information

Timeline for Services. Within 10 business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will review the packet for completion and forward it to the LEA’s NPS of choice. The NPS will contact the parent and placement will be made within 10 business days. The NPS will work directly with the LEA to schedule an IEP within 30 days of the student’s placement at the school. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA.










Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop a Master Contract with the NPS if one does not currently exist and an Individual Service Agreement (ISA). The ISA will be forwarded to the appropriate NPS for signature. The SELPA will enter the NPS placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database. School-based occupational therapy (OT) supports the student’s ability to gain access to and make progress in the school curriculum. OT supports a child’s engagement and participation in daily occupations, which includes activities in daily living, education, prevocational work, work, play, rest, leisure, and social participation. OT works on mediation (improving sensory and motor foundations of learning and behavior) to help the child succeed in school. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for an OT assessment.

2. Complete the Occupational Therapy Referral form (D/M 120A) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.




• It is important that the parent/guardian return the form to the LEA on the date that it is signed or as soon as possible thereafter. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped.

4. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name if known. If not, leave the field blank.


D/M 120A Occupational Therapy Referral form



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for occupational therapy

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for occupational therapy


Timeline for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA, will forward it to a SELPA occupational therapist. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. Timeline for Services. Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the occupational therapist that conducted the assessment or the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to determine whether or not services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the services should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.








Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for signature and forward it to the occupational therapist or the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature who will then assign a therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the OT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.






D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or

Disclosure of Information form D/M 120A Occupational Therapy Referral

form Current occupational therapy report, if

available, that specifies the occupational therapy services the student was receiving and the occupational therapy goals

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for occupational therapy that lists occupational therapy services and goals

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for occupational therapy

Timeline for Assessment. An assessment is not required for transfer referrals. Assessments are completed at three-year intervals (from the date that the services originally began) unless there are extenuating circumstances that dictate otherwise. Timeline for Services. Within five business days of receipt of the transfer referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for signature and forward it to the occupational therapist or the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature who will then assign a therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the occupational therapy services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

School-based physical therapy (PT) supports the student’s ability to gain access to and make progress in the school curriculum. It corrects, facilitates, or adapts to the student’s functional performance in motor control and coordination, posture and balance, functional mobility, accessibility, and the use of assistive devices. PT works on compensation (i.e. modifying the environment, tools, or task) to help the child succeed in school. Pre-Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a PT assessment.

2. Complete the Physical Therapy Referral form (D/M 120B) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.

3. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency as the SELPA.








http://dmselpa.org/resources/1/forms/120B.pdf





• The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the Parental Authorization section form D/M 66.

• It is important that the parent/guardian return the form to the LEA on the date that it is signed or as soon as possible thereafter. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped.

Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

D/M 120B Physical Therapy Referral form



Physician’s note with diagnosis

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for physical therapy

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for physical therapy

Timeline for Assessment. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA, will review the packet for completion and forward it to the appropriate physical therapist. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. Timeline for Services. Upon completion of the PT assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by the physical therapist or the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting.

The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to determine whether or not PT services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the service should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will assign a physical therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the PT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.








D/M 120B Physical Therapy Referral form











Current physical therapy report, if available, that specifies the physical therapy services the student was receiving and the physical therapy goals

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for physical therapy that lists physical therapy services and goals

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for physical therapy

Timeline for Assessment. An assessment is not required for transfer referrals. Assessments are completed at three-year intervals (from the date that the services originally began) unless there are extenuating circumstances that dictate otherwise. Timeline for Services. PT services for the student will begin immediately upon receipt of the physical therapy transfer referral packet by the SELPA physical therapist. The SELPA will enter the PT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to confirm the student is eligible for special education services and determine a need for a referral for mental health evaluation.

2. Refer the student to the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) for a mental health evaluation to determine eligibility for residential placement. IEP attendees must include the SELPA Nonpublic School Coordinator and a DMCC representative.

3. If the student does not meet the baseline criteria for residential placement, the referral process ends.

4. If the IEP team determines that the referral is appropriate, the referral process continues.

5. Complete the Residential Placement Assessment Referral form (D/M 151).

6. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency as the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC).



D/M 151 Residential Placement Assessment Referral form

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for an assessment for residential eligibility

Most current complete annual or triennial IEP

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years from the time the student was identified as eligible for special education and related services

Any additional information in support of the referral

Timeline for Assessment. Upon receipt of the completed referral:

• Upon receipt of the completed referral:

• The Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will forward the referral to the DMCC for processing.

• The DMCC will send out an Assessment Plan (D/M 66) to the parent/guardian for consent for assessment.

• Upon receipt of the signed Assessment Plan (D/M 66), the 60 day assessment timeline begins.

• The DMCC will conduct the assessment.

• The DMCC will contact the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA when the assessment is complete to schedule an IEP.

Timeline for Services. Upon completion of the residential assessment, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will coordinate an IEP team meeting to determine eligibility for residential placement services.








If the IEP team agrees that the student is eligible for and requires residential placement as the least restrictive environment, the DMCC will forward residential placement packets to potential residential treatment centers (RTCs). Upon receipt of responses from the residential facilities, the results will be shared with the student’s parent/guardian and a facility will be selected. The student will be enrolled at the selected RTC as soon as possible. Transportation of the student to the RTC is based on the LEA of residence’s reimbursement policy. After the student is placed at the RTC, the LEA of residence will schedule a transfer IEP meeting within 30 days to document the new placement. The placement should be listed on an IEP document, including the NPS, residential placement, start date, duration, and frequency of each service to be provided. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) with the NPS and RTC. If a Master Contract does not exist, one will be developed and an ISA. The SELPA will enter the NPS and RTC placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

The local education agency that placed the student at the beginning of the fiscal year is responsible for funding the residential placement for the remainder of the school year, including extended school year (ESY). EC 56325(c) Pre-Referral Procedures – District Responsibility


2. Confirm the student’s current residential placement and educational services through a review of current IEP.


Referral Procedures - LEA Responsibility Upon confirmation of prior placement, forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA.



IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year that documents the previous residential placement

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for residential placement

Any additional information in support of the referral

Timeline for Services. The new LEA of residence will schedule an IEP team meeting within 30 days of the transfer to document the new placement. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, residential placement, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA.

Special health care services are available for students who have special health care needs. Pre-Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for special health care services.

2. Complete the Special Health Care Services Referral form (D/M 148) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.









Referral Procedure - LEA Responsibility Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

D/M 148 Special Health Care Services Referral form


IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for special health care services

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for special health care services

Current Summary of Treatment Plan

Must be signed by physician and parent/guardian

Must include diagnosis

Must specify special health care need required

Must specify medication type and dosage

Must specify administration instructions

Any additional supporting information Timeline for Services. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) and forward it to the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature.

Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA. The agency will contact the person who signed the referral to coordinate and begin services. The SELPA will enter the services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.








D/M 148 Special Health Care Services Referral form

Current Summary of Treatment Plan if available, that specifies the special health care services the student was receiving

IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for special health care services that lists the special health care services the student was receiving

Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for special health care services

Timeline for Services. Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) and forward it to the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature.

Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the transfer referral packet to the appropriate NPA. The agency will contact the person who signed the referral to coordinate and begin services. The SELPA will enter the services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.










APPENDIX B IEP Team Membership & Participation Q&As

SELPA Policy Chapter 4, Appendix D

Who are the required members of the IEP team? ANSWER: (a) Parent; (b) General education teacher; (c) Special education teacher/provider; (d) LEA representative; (e) an individual who can interpret the instructional implications of the assessment results. This individual may be the general education teacher, the special education teacher/provider, the LEA representative, or an individual invited by the parent or the LEA who has knowledge or special expertise regarding the student.

References: 34 CFR § 300.321(a)(1)-(5); Ed Code § 56341(b)(1)-(5)

Who are permissive members of the IEP Team? ANSWER: (a) at the discretion of the parent, guardian, or the LEA, other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the student, including related services personnel, as appropriate; (b) wherever appropriate, the student. References: 34 CFR § 300.321(a)(6)-(7); Ed Code § 56341(b)(6)-(7)

Are there any additional IEP team membership requirements for an initial eligibility where a student is suspected of having a specific learning disability? ANSWER: Yes. At least one member of the IEP team must be qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of children, such as a school psychologist, speech-language pathologist, or remedial teacher. There is nothing to preclude an existing member of the IEP team from meeting this requirement as long as he/she was “qualified to conduct individual diagnostic examinations of children.” At least one team member must have observed the

student’s academic performance and behavior in the areas of difficulty in the student’s learning environment, including the regular classroom setting. References: 34 CFR § 300.310; Ed Code § 56341(c)

Who must an LEA invite to IEP team meetings and under what conditions? ANSWER: (a) the student, if the purpose of the meeting will be to consider postsecondary goals and needed transition services; (b) With the consent of the parents or the student who has reached the age of majority, a representative of a participating agency that is likely to be responsible for providing or paying for transition services. (c) In the case of a child previously served under the Part C infant program, and upon the request of the parent, the infant and toddlers with disabilities coordinator or other representative of the early education or early intervention system. (d) A representative of a private school, before the LEA places a child with a disability in, or refers a child to, a private school or facility. References: 34 CFR §§ 300.321(b), 300.321(b)(3), 300.321(f), 300.325(a)(2); Ed Code §§ 56341(d)(1), 56341(d)(3), 56341(i).

What are the qualifications for the LEA representative?

ANSWER: The LEA representative must meet all of the following: (a) Is qualified to provide, or supervise the provision of specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of individuals with exceptional needs (b) Is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum (c) Is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the LEA References: 34 CFR § 300.321(a)(4); Ed Code § 56341(b)(4)



Who is considered “qualified” to provide, or supervise the provision of, specially designed instruction? ANSWER: The term “qualified” is defined in Section 3001(y) of Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations as meaning that “a person has met federal and state certification, licensing, registration, or other comparable requirements…” A person qualified to provide specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of individuals with exceptional needs would need to be an individual who possesses certification, license or registration in the field of special education such as a speech language pathologist, school psychologist, special education teacher, occupational therapist, and physical therapist. A person qualified to supervise the provision of specially designed instruction to meet the needs of individuals with exceptional needs would need to be an individual who possesses certification as an administrator. Reference: 5 CCR § 3001(y)

Does the “qualified” individual need to be an administrator, special education teacher, or provider at the time of the IEP meeting? ANSWER: No. The “qualified” individual could be serving in a different role as long as he/she possessed the necessary certification, license, or registration as an administrator, special education teacher, or provider. A provider would include an individual who is qualified to provide special education or related services such as a special education teacher, speech language pathologist, school psychologist, occupational therapist, and physical therapist. Likewise, a general education teacher could be considered qualified to provide specially designed instruction if he/she also possessed a special education teaching credential.

Can another member of the IEP team simultaneously serve as the LEA representative? If so, who, and under what conditions? ANSWER: Yes, an LEA may designate another LEA member of the IEP team to serve also as the LEA representative as long as the designated

individual meets the qualifications for a LEA representative. References: 34 CFR § 300.321(d); Ed Code § 56341(e).

How many simultaneous roles can an IEP team member play, or, how many hats can an IEP team member wear? ANSWER: (1) Parent: ONE (Parent) (2) General Education Teacher: THREE (General

Education Teacher; LEA Representative, if criteria are met; and Interpreter of Assessment Results)

(3) Special Education Teacher: THREE (Special Education Teacher; LEA Representative, if criteria are met; and Interpreter of Assessment Results)

(4) LEA Representative: TWO (LEA Representative and Interpreter of Assessment Results)

(5) Interpreter of Assessment Results: TWO (Interpreter of Assessment Results and LEA Representative, if criteria are met)

(6) Individuals with Knowledge or Expertise: THREE (Individual with Knowledge or Expertise; LEA representative, if criteria are met; and Interpreter of Assessment Results)

(7) Student: One (Student)

May an IEP team meeting be conducted without a parent in attendance? ANSWER: Yes, a meeting may be conducted without a parent in attendance if the LEA is unable to convince the parents that they should attend. In this case, the LEA must keep a record of its attempts to arrange a mutually agreed upon time and place for the meeting. The LEA is responsible for using other methods to ensure parent participation, such as individual or conference telephone calls. References: 34 CFR § 300.322(c)-(d); Ed Code § 56341.5(h)

What is the least number of members that may attend an IEP team meeting and still meet the requirements of the law?


ANSWER: Two, if the parent chooses not to attend after multiple efforts by the LEA. The two are the general education teacher and the special education teacher, so long as one of the latter two members is eligible to serve as the LEA representative and can interpret the instructional implications of the assessment results.

Who may be excused from attending an IEP team meeting? ANSWER: A required member of the IEP team from the LEA may be excused from attending an IEP team meeting, in whole or in part, if the parent and the LEA agree, in writing, that the attendance of a member is not necessary because the member’s area of the curriculum or related service is not being modified or discussed in the meeting. When the meeting involves a modification to or discussion of the LEA member’s area of the curriculum or related service, the member may be excused from attending the meeting, in whole or in part, if the parent, in writing, and the LEA consent to the excusal and the member submits, in writing to the parent and the IEP team, input into the development of the IEP prior to the meeting. References: 34 CFR § 300.321(e); Ed Code § 56341(f)-(g).


APPENDIX C Discipline Procedures Q&As U.S. Department of Education (6/2009) http://idea.ed.gov/object/fileDownload/model/QaCorner/field/PdfFile/primary_key/7

SAFEGUARDS Question A1: When the parent(s) of a child and the school personnel are in agreement about the child’s change of placement after the child has violated a code of student conduct, is it considered to be a removal under the discipline provisions? Answer: No, if the parent(s) of a child and the school district agree to a specific change in the current educational placement of the child.

Question A2: When a parent consents to the initial provision of some, but not all, of the proposed special education and related services, do the discipline provisions apply if the child violates the school’s code of student conduct? Answer: Yes. When a parent consents to the initial provision of some, but not all, of the proposed special education and related services listed in a child’s initial individualized education program (IEP), the child has been determined eligible for services and is entitled to all the protections of the IDEA.

Question A3: Do the discipline provisions apply if the child violates the school’s code of student conduct after a parent revokes consent for special education and related services under §300.300(b)? Answer: No. Under §§ 300.9 and 300.300, parents are permitted to unilaterally withdraw their children from further receipt of special education and related services by revoking their consent for the continued provision of special education and related services to their children. When a parent revokes consent for special education and related services under §300.300(b), the parent has refused services as described in §300.534(c)(1)(ii); therefore, the public agency is not deemed to have knowledge that the child is a child with a disability and the child will be subject to the same disciplinary procedures and timelines applicable to general

education students and not entitled to IDEA’s discipline protections. It is expected that parents will take into account the possible consequences under the discipline procedures before revoking consent for the provision of special education and related services. 73 Federal Register 73012-73013.

Question A4: In order to receive the protections for disciplinary purposes in 34 CFR §300.534, parents who are concerned that their child may need special education and related services must first express their concerns in writing. How are parents informed of this requirement? Answer: Neither the IDEA nor the regulations specifically address this issue. However, in its child find policies and procedures, a State may choose to include ways to provide information to the public regarding IDEA’s protections for disciplinary purposes when a parent has expressed in writing to school personnel concerns regarding the child’s need for special education and related services. Examples of ways to provide such information include making the information available on the State’s Web site, the LEA’s Web site, or in the State’s Procedural Safeguards Notice or the school’s student handbook.

Question A5: Under 34 CFR §300.534(b), a public agency is deemed to have knowledge that a child is a child with a disability if a parent expressed in writing a concern that his or her child needs special education and related services. What happens if a parent is unable to express this concern in writing? Answer: The requirement that a parent express his or her concern in writing is taken directly from the IDEA. However, there is nothing in the IDEA or the regulations that would prevent a parent from requesting assistance to communicate his or her concerns in writing. The Department funds Parent Training and Information Centers (PTIs) and Community Parent Resource Centers (CPRCs) to assist parents of students with disabilities. Information about the PTIs and CPRCs is found at http://www.taalliance.org/.

Question A6: If a removal is for 10 consecutive school days or less and occurs after a student has been removed for 10 school days in that same school year, and the public agency

http://idea.ed.gov/object/fileDownload/model/QaCorner/field/PdfFile/primary_key/7

http://idea.ed.gov/object/fileDownload/model/QaCorner/field/PdfFile/primary_key/7


determines, under 34 CFR §300.530(d)(4), that the removal does not constitute a change of placement, must the agency provide written notice to the parent? Answer: No. Under Part B, a public agency’s determination that a short-term removal does not constitute a change of placement is not a proposal or refusal to initiate a change of placement for purposes of determining services under 34 CFR §300.530(d)(4). Therefore, the agency is not required to provide written notice to the parent.

Question A7: If a teacher or other school personnel has specific concerns that a child may need special education and related services due to a child’s pattern of behavior, must such concerns be submitted in writing to school officials in order for the public agency to be deemed to have knowledge that the child is a child with a disability? Answer: No. Under 34 CFR §300.534(b)(3), teachers or other local educational agency (LEA) personnel are not required to submit a written statement expressing specific concerns about a pattern of behavior demonstrated by the child in order for the public agency to be deemed to have knowledge that the child is a child with a disability. Although a written statement is not necessary, the teacher of the child or other LEA personnel must express their specific concerns directly to the special education director or other supervisory personnel within the agency. In addition, State child find policies and procedures may provide guidelines regarding how teachers and other LEA personnel should communicate their specific concerns regarding a child’s pattern of behavior. If the State’s or LEA’s child find or referral procedures do not specify how such communication should occur, the State or LEA is encouraged to change its guidelines to provide a method for communicating direct expressions of specific concerns regarding a child’s pattern of behavior. 71 Federal Register 46727.

DEFINITIONS Question B1: What options are available for school personnel when a student with a disability commits a serious crime, such as rape, at school or at a school function? Answer: Under most State and local laws, school personnel must report certain crimes that

occur on school grounds to the appropriate authorities. The IDEA regulations, under 34 CFR §300.535(a), do not prohibit the school or public agency from reporting crimes committed by students with disabilities. In addition, where such crimes constitute a violation of the school’s code of student conduct, school authorities may use the relevant discipline provisions related to short-term and long-term removals, including seeking a hearing to remove the student to an interim alternative educational placement if maintaining the current placement is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or others. To the extent that such criminal acts also result in an injury that meets the definition of “serious bodily injury,” the removal provisions of 34 CFR §300.530(g) would apply. The definition referenced in 34 CFR §300.530(i)(3) currently reads: As defined at 18 U.S.C. 1365(h)(3), the term serious bodily injury means bodily injury that involves –

1. A substantial risk of death; 2. Extreme physical pain; 3. Protracted and obvious disfigurement; or 4. Protracted loss or impairment of the

function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty.

Certain Federal cases have held that rape met this definition of serious bodily injury because the victim suffered protracted impairment of mental faculties. The current definition of the term “serious bodily injury” in 18 U.S.C. 1365(h)(3) can be found on the U.S. House of Representatives Web site at http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C65.txt.

Question B2: What is the definition of “unique circumstances” as used in 34 CFR §300.530(a), which states that “school personnel may consider any unique circumstances on a case-by-case basis when determining whether a change in placement, consistent with the other requirements of this section, is appropriate for a child with a disability who violates a code of student conduct?” Answer: The Department believes that “unique circumstances” are best determined at the local level by school personnel who know the individual child and are familiar with the facts and circumstances regarding a child’s behavior. “Factors such as a child’s disciplinary history, ability to understand consequences,


expression of remorse, and supports provided … prior to the violation of a school code [of student conduct] could be unique circumstances considered by school personnel when determining whether a disciplinary change in placement is appropriate for a child with a disability.” 71 Federal Register 46714.

Question B3: May a public agency apply its own definition of “serious bodily injury?” Answer: No. As specifically set out in the IDEA, the term “serious bodily injury” is defined at 18 U.S.C. 1365(h)(3) and cannot be altered by States or local school boards. The definition and a link to the current U.S. Code is included in the answer to question B-1, and also in the Analysis of Comments and Changes that accompanied the regulations published on August 14, 2006, and became effective on October 13, 2006. 71 Federal Register 46723. INTERIM ALTERNATIVE EDUCATIONAL SETTING (IAES) Question C1: What constitutes an appropriate IAES? Answer: What constitutes an appropriate IAES will depend on the circumstances of each individual case. An IAES must be selected so as to enable the child to continue to participate in the general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to progress toward meeting the goals set out in the child’s IEP. 71 Federal Register 46722.

Question C2: May a public agency offer “home instruction” as the sole IAES option? Answer: No. For removals under 34 CFR §300.530(c), (d)(5), and (g), the child’s IEP Team determines the appropriate IAES (34 CFR §300.531). Section 615(k)(1)(D) of the IDEA and 34 CFR §300.530(d) are clear that an appropriate IAES must be selected “so as to enable the child to continue to participate in the general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to progress toward meeting the goals set out in the child’s IEP.” Therefore, it would be inappropriate for a public agency to limit an IEP Team to only one option when determining the appropriate IAES. As noted in the Analysis of Comments and Changes accompanying the regulations published on

August 14, 2006, and became effective on October 13, 2006, at 71 Federal Register 46722: Whether a child’s home would be an appropriate interim alternative educational setting under §300.530 would depend on the particular circumstances of an individual case such as the length of the removal, the extent to which the child previously has been removed from his or her regular placement, and the child’s individual needs and educational goals. In general, though, because removals under §§300.530(g) and 300.532 will be for periods of time up to 45 days, care must be taken to ensure that if home instruction is provided for a child removed under §300.530, the services that are provided will satisfy the requirements for services for a removal under §300.530(d) and section 615(k)(1)(D) of the Act. Where the removal is for a longer period, such as a 45-day removal under 34 CFR §300.530(g), special care should be taken to ensure that the services required under 34 CFR §300.530(d) can be properly provided if the IEP Team determines that a child’s home is the appropriate IAES.

Question C3: Do all services in the child’s IEP need to be provided in the IAES for a removal under 34 CFR § 300.530(c) or (g)? Answer: It depends on the needs of the child. The LEA is not required to provide all services in the child’s IEP when a child has been removed to an IAES. In general, the child’s IEP Team will make an individualized decision for each child with a disability regarding the type and intensity of services to be provided in the IAES. 34 CFR §300.530(d)(1) clarifies that a child with a disability who is removed from his or her current placement for disciplinary reasons under 34 CFR §300.530(c) or (g) must continue to receive educational services as provided in 34 CFR §300.101(a), so as to enable the child to continue to participate in the general education curriculum, although in another setting, and to progress toward meeting his or her IEP goals. For removals that constitute a change of placement, the child’s IEP Team determines the appropriate services under 34 CFR §300.530(d)(1). See 34 CFR §300.530(d)(5). If a student whose placement has been changed under 34 CFR §300.530(c) or (g) is not progressing toward meeting the IEP goals, then it would be appropriate for the IEP Team to review and revise the determination of services and/or the IAES.


HEARINGS Question D1: Must a hearing officer make a sufficiency determination under 34 CFR §300.508(d) for an expedited due process complaint? In other words, does the hearing officer need to determine if the complaint meets the content standards listed in section 615(b)(7)(A) of the IDEA and 34 CFR §300.508(b)? Answer: No. The sufficiency provision does not apply to expedited due process complaints. See 34 CFR §300.532(a). As noted in the Analysis of Comments and Changes accompanying the regulations published on August 14, 2006, and became effective on October 13, 2006 at 71 Federal Register 46725: In light of the shortened timelines for conducting an expedited due process hearing under §300.532(c), it is not practical to apply to the expedited due process hearing the sufficiency provision in §300.508(d), which requires that the due process complaint must be deemed sufficient unless the party receiving the due process complaint notifies the hearing officer and the other party in writing, within 15 days of receipt of the due process complaint, that the receiving party believes the due process complaint does not include all the necessary content of a complaint as required in §300.508(b).

FUNCTIONAL BEHAVIOR ASSESSMENTS (FBAs) AND BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION PLANS (BIPs) Question E1: Was the requirement for a “positive behavioral intervention plan” removed from the discipline regulations? Answer: No. Under 34 CFR §300.324(a)(2)(i), the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports must be considered in the case of a child whose behavior impedes his or her learning or that of others. The requirement in 34 CFR §300.530(f) that a child with a disability receive, as appropriate, an FBA and a BIP and modifications designed to address the child’s behavior now only applies to students whose behavior is a manifestation of their disability as

determined by the LEA, the parent, and the relevant members of the child’s IEP Team under 34 CFR §300.530(e). However, FBAs and BIPs must also be used proactively, if the IEP Team determines that they would be appropriate for the child. The regulations in 34 CFR §300.530(d) require that school districts provide FBAs and behavior intervention services (and modifications) “as appropriate” to students when the student’s disciplinary change in placement would exceed 10 consecutive school days and the student’s behavior was not a manifestation of his or her disability. See 34 CFR §300.530(c) and (d). Please see question E-2 in this section for more information about the use and development of FBAs and BIPs.

Question E2: Under what circumstances must an IEP team use FBAs and BIPs? Answer: As noted above, pursuant to 34 CFR §300.530(f), FBAs and BIPs are required when the LEA, the parent, and the relevant members of the child’s IEP Team determine that a student’s conduct was a manifestation of his or her disability under 34 CFR §300.530(e). If a child’s misconduct has been found to have a direct and substantial relationship to his or her disability, the IEP Team will need to conduct an FBA of the child, unless one has already been conducted. Similarly, the IEP Team must write a BIP for this child, unless one already exists. If a BIP already exists, then the IEP Team will need to review the plan and modify it, as necessary, to address the behavior. An FBA focuses on identifying the function or purpose behind a child’s behavior. Typically, the process involves looking closely at a wide range of child-specific factors (e.g., social, affective, environmental). Knowing why a child misbehaves is directly helpful to the IEP Team in developing a BIP that will reduce or eliminate the misbehavior. For a child with a disability whose behavior impedes his or her learning or that of others, and for whom the IEP Team has decided that a BIP is appropriate, or for a child with a disability whose violation of the code of student conduct is a manifestation of the child’s disability, the IEP Team must include a BIP in the child’s IEP to address the behavioral needs of the child.

Question E3: How can an IEP address behavior?


Answer: When a child’s behavior impedes the child’s learning or that of others, the IEP Team must consider the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and other strategies, to address that behavior (34 CFR §300.324(a)(2)(i)). Additionally, the Team may address the behavior through annual goals in the IEP (34 CFR §300.320(a)(2)(i)). The child’s IEP may include modifications in his or her program, support for his or her teachers, and any related services necessary to achieve those behavioral goals (34 CFR §300.320(a)(4)). If the child needs a BIP to improve learning and socialization, the BIP can be included in the IEP and aligned with the goals in the IEP.

Question E4: Is consent required to do an FBA for a child? Answer: Yes. An FBA is generally understood to be an individualized evaluation of a child in accordance with 34 CFR §§300.301 through 300.311 to assist in determining whether the child is, or continues to be, a child with a disability. The FBA process is frequently used to determine the nature and extent of the special education and related services that the child needs, including the need for a BIP. As with other individualized evaluation procedures, and consistent with 34 CFR §300.300(a) and (c), parental consent is required for an FBA to be conducted as part of the initial evaluation or a reevaluation.

Question E5: If a parent disagrees with the results of an FBA, may the parent obtain an independent educational evaluation (IEE) at public expense? Answer: Yes. The parent of a child with a disability has the right to request an IEE of the child, under 34 CFR §300.502, if the parent disagrees with an evaluation obtained by the public agency. However, the parent’s right to an IEE at public expense is subject to certain conditions, including the LEA’s option to request a due process hearing to show that its evaluation is appropriate. See 34 CFR §300.502(b)(2) through (b)(5). The Department has clarified previously that an FBA that was not identified as an initial evaluation, was not included as part of the required triennial reevaluation, or was not done in response to a disciplinary removal, would nonetheless be considered a reevaluation or part of a reevaluation under Part B because it was an individualized evaluation conducted in order to

develop an appropriate IEP for the child. Therefore, a parent who disagrees with an FBA that is conducted in order to develop an appropriate IEP also is entitled to request an IEE. Subject to the conditions in 34 CFR §300.502(b)(2) through (b)(5), the IEE of the child will be at public expense.

MANIFESTATION DETERMINATIONS Question F1: What occurs if there is no agreement on whether a child’s behavior was or was not a manifestation of his or her disability? Answer: If the parents of a child with a disability, the LEA, and the relevant members of the child’s IEP Team cannot reach consensus or agreement on whether the child’s behavior was or was not a manifestation of the disability, the public agency must make the determination and provide the parent with prior written notice pursuant to 34 CFR §300.503. The parent of the child with a disability has the right to exercise his or her procedural safeguards by requesting mediation and/or a due process hearing to resolve a disagreement about the manifestation determination. 34 CFR §300.506 and §300.532(a). A parent also has the right to file a State complaint alleging a violation of Part B related to the manifestation determination. See 34 CFR §300.153.

Question F2: What recourse does a parent have if he or she disagrees with the determination that his or her child’s behavior was not a manifestation of the child’s disability? Answer: The regulations, in 34 CFR §300.532(a), provide that the parent of a child with a disability who disagrees with the manifestation determination under 34 CFR §300.530(e) may appeal the decision by requesting a hearing. A parent also has the right to file a State complaint alleging a denial of a free appropriate public education and to request voluntary mediation under 34 CFR §300.506.

Question F3: Is the IEP Team required to hold a manifestation determination each time that a student is removed for more than 10 consecutive school days or each time that the public agency determines that a series of removals constitutes a change of placement?


Answer: Yes. 34 CFR §300.530(e) requires that “within 10 school days of any decision to change the placement of a child with a disability because of a violation of a code of student conduct” the LEA, the parent, and relevant members of the child’s IEP Team must conduct a manifestation determination (emphasis added). Under 34 CFR §300.536, a change of placement occurs if the removal is for more than 10 consecutive school days, or if the public agency determines, on a case-by-case basis, that a pattern of removals constitutes a change of placement because the series of removals total more than 10 school days in a school year; the child’s behavior is substantially similar to the behavior that resulted in the previous removals; and because of such additional factors as the length of each removal, the total amount of time the child has been removed, and the proximity of the removals to one another.

Question F4: Does a school need to conduct a manifestation determination when there is a violation under 34 CFR §300.530(g), which refers to a removal for weapons, drugs, or serious bodily injury? Answer: Yes. Within 10 school days of any decision to change the placement of a child with a disability because of a violation of a code of student conduct, the LEA, the parent, and relevant members of the child’s IEP Team conduct the manifestation determination. 34 CFR §300.530(e). However, when the removal is for weapons, drugs, or serious bodily injury under §300.530(g), the child may remain in an IAES, as determined by the child’s IEP Team, for not more than 45 school days, regardless of whether the violation was a manifestation of his or her disability. This type of removal can occur if the child: carries a weapon to or possesses a weapon at school, on school premises, or to or at a school function under the jurisdiction of the State educational agency (SEA) or LEA; knowingly possesses or uses illegal drugs, or sells or solicits the sale of a controlled substance, while at school, on school premises, or at a school function under the jurisdiction of the SEA or LEA; or has inflicted serious bodily injury upon another person while at school, on school premises, or at a school function under the jurisdiction of the SEA or LEA.

Question F5: What disciplinary procedures would apply in the case of a child who has been referred for a special education evaluation and is

removed for a disciplinary infraction prior to determination of eligibility? Answer: If a child engages in behavior that violates the code of student conduct prior to a determination of his or her eligibility for special education and related services and the public agency is deemed to have knowledge of the child’s disability, the child is entitled to all of the IDEA protections afforded to a child with a disability, unless a specific exception applies. In general, once the student is properly referred for an evaluation under Part B of the IDEA, the public agency would be deemed to have knowledge that the child is a child with a disability for purposes of the IDEA’s disciplinary provisions. However, under 34 CFR §300.534(c), the LEA is considered not to have knowledge that a child is a child with a disability if the parent has not allowed the evaluation of the child under Part B of the IDEA, the parent has refused services, or if the child is evaluated and determined not to be a child with a disability under Part B of the IDEA. In these instances, the child would be subject to the same disciplinary measures applicable to children without disabilities.

Question F6: Is there a conflict between 34 CFR §300.530(c), allowing school personnel, under certain circumstances, to apply the relevant disciplinary procedures to a child with a disability in the same manner and for the same duration as would be applied to children without disabilities, and the provision, in 34 CFR §300.532(b)(2), that the hearing officer may order a change in placement for not more than 45 school days if the hearing officer determines that maintaining the current placement of the child is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or to others? Answer: No, there is no conflict between the two provisions. In addition to the specific authority set out in 34 CFR §300.532, a hearing officer also has the authority to uphold a disciplinary change of placement made by school personnel under 34 CFR §300.530(c). Where the parent brings a due process hearing to challenge a disciplinary change of placement made by school personnel under 34 CFR §300.530(c) and the hearing officer concludes that the disciplinary requirements of Part B have been met, the hearing officer would properly uphold the disciplinary change of placement. If the hearing officer concludes that the child’s behavior was a manifestation of the child’s disability, but also determines that returning the


child to the prior placement is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or to others, then the hearing officer, under 34 CFR §300.532(b)(2), may change the placement to an appropriate IAES for not more than 45 school days.


APPENDIX D Mediation & Due Process SELPA Policy Chapter 7, Appendix D

ABOUT MEDIATION Question 1: What is the difference between a pre-hearing alternate dispute resolution and a hearing? Answer: A mediation conference or alternative dispute resolution conference is an informal meeting by which the parents, the school and an experienced impartial mediator attempt to resolve the dispute in a nonadversarial atmosphere. State law currently allows for two types of mediation: 1) a pre-hearing request mediation or 2) a mediation that is scheduled when there is a request for a due process hearing. The parties’ rights under each type of mediation are different and are discussed in more detail below. A hearing is a more formal procedure where all parties are given a chance to present their evidence and argument before an impartial hearing officer. The hearing officer then makes the final administrative decision concerning the matter in dispute.

Question 2: Who may request a alternate dispute resolution or hearing? Answer: The parents, including guardians, of a disabled child or child suspected of having a disability and the LEA may ask for an alternate dispute resolution or hearing. In some cases, the disabled child may ask for an alternate dispute resolution or hearing.

Question 3: When may an alternate dispute resolution or hearing be requested? Answer: An alternate dispute resolution or hearing may be requested when there is a dispute between a parent and a public agency providing special education services regarding a child’s eligibility for special education, need for assessment, and/or the child’s program and services. Please note, these procedural safeguards describe two potential opportunities for mediation. A party may request an alternate dispute resolution prior to, or without requesting, a hearing. This is known as “pre-hearing request mediation.” The “pre-hearing request mediation” is included in the law to

encourage parties to resolve disputes prior to requesting a hearing. Alternatively, if a hearing is requested, a mediation conference is automatically scheduled as part of the process, unless mediation is waived by one of the parties.

PRE-HEARING REQUEST MEDIATION Question 1: How does one request an alternate dispute resolution? Answer: Either parents or schools may request a pre-hearing request mediation conference by submitting a written request to the superintendent of the district within which the child resides. The request should provide as complete information as possible. The request can be made in the form of a letter that includes the following information:

1. Name of the child 2. Date of birth of the child 3. Child’s grade level 4. Address where the child resides 5. School district where the child attends 6. School district where the child resides 7. Parent or guardian’s name, address, and

telephone number 8. Any other school district or public

agency that is responsible for providing services that should be a party in the mediation

The party should make it clear that he/she is asking for a pre-hearing request mediation.

Question 2: How will the parties, parents, and school be notified that mediation has been requested? Answer: Upon receipt of a request for a mediation conference, the superintendent will promptly notify all parties regarding the date scheduled for the conference.

Question 3: How soon will the mediation conference be scheduled? Answer: The mediation conference will be scheduled to take place within 15 days of the request for mediation.

Question 4: How soon will the mediation conference be completed?



Answer: The law requires that the mediation be completed within 30 days of the request for mediation unless all parties to the mediation agree to extend this time limit.

Question 5: Where will the mediation take place? Answer: The law requires that the mediation conference be scheduled at a time and place reasonably convenient to the parent and the student. The mediation conference is usually held in a local educational facility.

Question 6: Who will be the mediator? Answer: The mediation conference shall be conducted by a person knowledgeable in the process of reconciling differences in a nonadversarial manner. He or she will be impartial and will try to help the parties reach a resolution of the dispute that will be acceptable to each party.

Question 7: What if one of the parties does not want to participate in mediation? Answer: Mediation is based upon the commitment of all parties to try to reach a mutually satisfactory settlement. Mediation is encouraged because it is informal and nonadversarial and is more likely to lead to a lasting settlement of the dispute. However, participation in the prehearing request mediation is voluntary. If one of the parties declines the opportunity to participate, either party still has the option of requesting a state-level hearing.

Question 8: Must a party request mediation before asking for a hearing? Answer: No. Requesting or participating in mediation is not a prerequisite to requesting a due process hearing.

Question 9: Will attorneys be allowed in the mediation? Answer: The law provides that attorneys and other independent contractors who provide legal advocacy services shall not attend or otherwise participate in “pre-hearing request mediation.” They may, however, attend or otherwise

participate during all stages of the hearing process.

Question 10: Can a party bring a non-attorney to help in the mediation? Answer: Any party is allowed to be accompanied by and advised by non-attorney representatives in a mediation conference. A party may also consult an attorney prior to or after the mediation conference.

Question 11: What happens if the parties reach an agreement during the mediation conference? Answer: Any agreement reached during mediation must be to the satisfaction of all parties and must be consistent with the requirements of federal and state law. The agreement will be written up by the mediator and signed by the parties. Each party will receive a copy of the mediation agreement.

Question 12: What happens if an agreement is not reached during the mediation? Answer: If the dispute is not resolved during the mediation conference, the parties have the option of requesting a state-level hearing. The mediator will assist the parties in specifying any unresolved issues to be included in the hearing request. The parent, student, and public education agency involved may initiate the due process hearing procedures prescribed in Education Code sections 56500-56509 under any of the following circumstances:

• There is a proposal to initiate or change the identification, assessment, or educational placement of the child or the provision of the free appropriate education to the child.

• There is a refusal to initiate or change the identification, assessment, or educational placement of the child or the provision of a free appropriate public education to the child.

• The parent refuses to authorize the assessment of the child.

• There is a disagreement between a parent or guardian and a district, special education local plan area, or county office regarding the availability of a program appropriate for the child,


including the question of financial responsibility.

The following steps are required when initiating a due process hearing: Requests for a hearing are sent by the parent (or if the district is requesting a hearing, by the district) to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), Special Education Division, 2349 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95833-4231. Requests must include the student's name, residential address, the name of the student's school, a description of the problem, facts about the problem and a proposed resolution. A due process hearing may not take place until the party or the attorney representing the party files a notice that meets these requirements. The district notifies the SELPA Due Process Office and forwards the district and school files. The SELPA Program Manager contacts the parents regarding their request for due process and to discuss their concerns. The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) appoints a mediator and schedules a mediation date as well as a date for the hearing. The mediation hearing and hearing decision must be completed within 45 days of the receipt of the parents’ or district’s request. The Due Process Program Manager reviews the file and case with the district director, district staff, and SELPA staff as appropriate and discusses options for resolving the issues. The parent or district may waive mediation and proceed directly to hearing. If the mediation process does not resolve the issue, the SELPA attorney, in consultation and cooperation with the district director and the Due Process Program Manager:

a. Prepares the case, including the list of witnesses and written evidence/documentation

b. Prepares the witnesses for their testimony

c. Presents the case in hearing d. Assists the district staff in the

implementation of the decision

HEARING PROCESS Question 1: How does one request a hearing?

Answer: Requests for a hearing are sent by the parent (or if the district is requesting a hearing, by the district) to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), Special Education Division, 2349 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95833-4231. Requests must include the student's name, residential address, the name of the student's school, a description of the problem, facts about the problem and a proposed resolution. A due process hearing may not take place until the party or the attorney representing the party files a notice that meets these requirements.

Question 2: How will the parties be notified that a hearing has been requested? Answer: Upon receipt of a request for a hearing, the Office of Administrative Hearings will promptly notify all parties regarding the date the hearing has been scheduled. The same notice will explain that a mediation conference has also been scheduled in the hope that a resolution of the dispute can occur without the case having to go to a hearing.

Question 3: Will a mediation conference be scheduled even if the parties have already attempted mediation prior to requesting a hearing? Answer: Yes. The law requires that the Special Education Hearing Office encourage mediation at all stages of the hearing process as a preferred method of resolving the dispute. Therefore, a mediation conference will automatically be scheduled whenever there is a hearing request, unless that request specifically waives mediation.

Question 4: Will attorneys be able to participate in mediations that take place when a hearing request has been filed? Answer: Yes. The law allows a party to be represented by an attorney at all stages of the hearing process. Any mediation that takes place when a hearing has been requested is considered part of the hearing process and, therefore, the parties have a right to be represented by attorneys during the mediation.

Question 5: When will the mediation and hearing be scheduled?


Answer: The mediation conference is usually scheduled for a date approximately 15 days after a hearing request is received. The initial hearing date is usually set for approximately 25 days after the hearing request is received. All parties will receive notice of the time and place of the hearing and the time and place of the mediation in the same notice. The hearing may be postponed to another date if mediation is continued and the parties agree to the postponement. If the hearing is postponed, the parties will receive a notice of the new date and time of the hearing.

Question 6: How long will the hearing process take? Answer: The law requires that the hearing be held and a written decision mailed within 45 days of the receipt of the request for hearing. However, the 45 days can be extended by a continuance or postponement of the hearing.

Question 7: When is it permissible to have a continuance or postponement of the hearing? Answer: A continuance request is a motion to postpone the hearing. The law provides that either party may request a continuance of the hearing for good cause. If the Office of Administrative Hearings determines there is good cause, the hearing will be continued or postponed and the 45-day time limit will be extended by the number of days of the continuance or postponement.

Question 8: What does it mean to take the hearing off the calendar? Answer: “Off the calendar” means that no hearing dates are set for the matter. By agreeing to have the hearing taken off calendar, the 45-day requirement for issuing a final hearing decision is extended by the number of days the matter is off calendar plus an additional 20 days to provide time to reschedule the hearing. A hearing may be taken off calendar only by agreement of all of the parties. A hearing that is off calendar will be returned to the calendar at the written request of any party.

Question 9: Who will conduct the hearing? Answer: The hearing will be conducted by an impartial hearing officer employed by the Office of Administrative Hearings. The hearing officer is

knowledgeable in the laws governing special education and administrative hearings.

Question 10: What authority does the hearing officer have? Answer: The hearing officer has the authority to conduct the hearing, rule on all procedural matters, and render the final decision. By statute, the hearing officer may:

• Question a witness on the record prior to any of the parties doing so;

• With the consent of all parties to the hearing, request that conflicting experts discuss an issue or issues with each other while off the record;

• Visit the proposed placement site when the physical attributes of the site are at issue;

• Call a witness to testify at the hearing if all parties to the hearing consent to the witness giving testimony or if the hearing is continued for at least five days prior to witness testifying;

• Order that an impartial assessment of the student be conducted, the cost of which to be paid by the Hearing Office;

• Bar introduction of any documents or the testimony of any witnesses not disclosed to the hearing officer or the parties at least five business days prior to the hearing; and

• Call independent medical specialists as witnesses in cases involving the provision of related services by other public agencies, the cost for such witnesses to be paid by the Hearing Office.

Question 11: Where will the hearing be held? Answer: The law requires that the hearing be held at a place reasonably convenient to the parent and the student. Hearings may be held in a local school facility or SELPA office.

Question 12: What will happen to the child’s education during the hearing process? Answer: The law requires that the student remain in his or her present educational placement during the hearing process and pending the written decision, unless the school and the parents agree otherwise. This requirement is often referred to as the “stay put” provision of the law. The “stay put”


requirement does not necessarily apply to prehearing request mediations. Recent federal law has created two important exceptions to stay put. For more information see Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, P.L. 105-17, Title I, Part B, Section 615 (k)(1) and (2).

Question 13: What are the parties’ rights during the hearing? Answer: All parties have the following rights during the hearing: Right to representation. All parties have the right to be accompanied, advised, and assisted by counsel and by persons with special knowledge or training related to the problems of disabled children. Right to present evidence and argument. All parties have the right to call witnesses and present written and other evidence that will help them prove their case. They will also be given the opportunity to argue the merits of their case orally or in writing. Right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. All parties have the right to be present when witnesses testify against their position and to ask them questions concerning their views. Right to compel the presence of witnesses. If a witness refuses to appear at the hearing voluntarily, the party requesting that witness has the right to force him or her to come to the hearing. This is accomplished by the use of subpoenas that are issued by the Office of Administrative Hearings. Before requesting a subpoena, the party should first determine whether the witness will be at the hearing voluntarily. Right to record of the hearing. The hearing officer will record the hearing with a tape recorder. The parties have the right to a record of the hearing. Right to written findings of fact and decision. The hearing office must prepare a written decision setting forth his or her findings of fact, analysis of the law, and final decision. Right to notice of issues for hearing and proposed resolution of the issues. The law requires that the parties submit to each other at

least ten (10) days prior to the hearing what they believe are the issues to be resolved in the hearing and their proposed resolution of the issues. A parent who is not represented by an attorney has the right to request assistance in identifying the issues and the proposed resolution of the issues. Right to prohibit the introduction of surprise evidence. A hearing officer may prohibit the introduction of any evidence at the hearing that has not been properly disclosed at least five business days before the hearing. That is why the notice of hearing instructs each party to give the other party – at least five business days before the hearing – a copy of all documents it plans to present in the hearing and a list of witnesses it expects to call and their general area of testimony. Right to exclude witnesses. A party may ask that the hearing office order prospective witnesses to remain outside the hearing room while other witnesses are testifying. This practice allows the hearing office to compare the testimonies of witnesses who have not heard each other testify. Right to an interpreter. If the primary language of a party is other than English, an interpreter will be provided by the Office of Administrative Hearings. It is important that parties notify the Office of Administrative Hearings well before the hearing when an interpreter is needed. In addition to the right set out above, the parents have the following additional rights: Right to examine student records. Parents have the right to examine all records maintained by the school that are related to their child and to receive copies within five days after requesting them. Parents should call or write their local school district to request access to student records. Right to public hearing. Parents have the right to allow members of the public to attend the hearing. Right to have the student present at the hearing. Parents have the right to have the disabled student present during the hearing.

Question 14: Are parents entitled to a free attorney?


Answer: All parties have the right to be represented at all stages of the hearing by an attorney or other representative of their choosing. That does not mean that the school or other public agency must pay for the parents’ attorney. Parents may be entitled to have the cost of the attorney’s fees reimbursed if they prevail as a consequence of initiating a due process hearing. The federal court, in its discretion, may award reasonable attorney’s fees to the parents or guardian of a disabled child or youth who is the prevailing party.

Question 15: Must a party give notice to the other parties if the party plans on using an attorney? Answer: Yes. The law requires that a party notify all other parties ten (10) days before a hearing if that party intends to be represented by an attorney in the hearing.

Question 16: What happens during the hearing? Answer: The purpose of the hearing is to allow all parties to present evidence supporting their positions and to explain to the hearing officer why they believe they should prevail in the hearing. The hearing is not governed by formal rules of procedure or evidence, and the hearing officer will attempt to ensure that both sides have an adequate opportunity to present their cases. Although less formal than a court trial, the hearing is expected to proceed in an orderly fashion. At the beginning of the hearing, the hearing officer turns on the tape recorder to make a record of the hearing and, after identifying the case for the record, briefly explains how the hearing will proceed. The hearing officer then usually clarifies the issues to be decided by discussing the case with the parties. The hearing officer may only speak with the parties about the case on the record. All other communication with the parties is prohibited. Once these preliminary matters are completed, the parties are given a chance to make opening statements. After the opening statements, the side presenting first will call its witnesses, with each witness being sworn to tell the truth. After one side has presented its witnesses and other evidence, the other side will call its witnesses. Each side will be given an opportunity to ask questions of the other side’s witnesses, and the hearing office may also ask questions of the

witnesses. At the end of the hearing, each side is allowed to make a closing statement. Sometimes the statement is presented orally during the hearing and sometimes it is submitted in writing after the hearing. After closing statements, the hearing record is closed. The hearing officer then prepares a written decision.

Question 17: How are documents put into evidence? Answer: To put documents into evidence, the party presents documents to the hearing officer and asks that they be put into evidence. Normally this is done at the beginning of the hearing. Remember that all parties must provide copies of the documents they wish to offer as evidence to the other parties and to the Hearing Office five business days prior to the hearing.

Question 18: How does one get a witness to come to the hearing? Answer: The party requesting the presence of the witness should first contact the witness and ask him or her to come to the hearing voluntarily. Parents wishing to call a witness who is an employee of the school may contact the school representative and ask for assistance in making the witness available. If a witness refuses to attend the hearing and a party believes that the witness is important to its case, the party may serve the person with a subpoena requiring his or her attendance. The subpoena may be requested by telephoning or writing the Office of Administrative Hearings. The Office of Administrative Hearings may ask for the name of the person to be served and an explanation of why that witness is needed.

Question 19: What law should one read and where can one locate it? Answer: There are four primary sources of law relating to special education and to hearings and mediations: California State statutes and regulations and federal statutes and regulations. Most of the state statutes relating to special education are contained in the Education Code. Part 30 of the Education Code from Section 56000 through Section 56885 contains the primary statutes relating to special education. Sections 56500-56509 contain the law relating to hearings and mediations. There are a number of sections in other state codes that also relate


to special education, including the Administrative Procedure Act, found in the California Government Code. Regulations of the State Board of Education relating to special education are contained in Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Sections 3000-3089. The California Department of Education publishes A Composite of Laws relating to special education, which includes all relevant state statutes and regulations. A copy can be obtained by writing or calling the Special Education Hearing Office. Federal statutes are contained in the United States Code, Volume 20, Sections 1400-1420. Also see the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. The federal regulations on special education are contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). To review a copy of the United States Code or the Code of Federal Regulations, a person may need to visit his or her local library or county law library. There are a number of court decisions that interpret the statutes and regulations. These court decisions can also be found at a county law library.

Question 20: What if a party doesn’t like the decision of the hearing officer? Answer: All parties have the right to appeal any hearing decision to a court of competent jurisdiction within 90 days of the receipt of the decision. Appeals can be made to either state or federal court. The hearing officer’s decision is the final administrative determination and is binding on all parties unless a party successfully appeals to a court. Additional rights of parents in relation to special education: There are a number of important rights that parents have in relation to special education. Below are listed some of the most important ones. • Right to initiate a referral to special

education. A parent has the right to request that a child be assessed and considered for special education services.

• Right to an independent assessment. If a parent disagrees with an assessment that has been obtained by the school, the parent

has the right to obtain, at public expense, one independent educational assessment of the student from qualified specialists for each district assessment the parent refutes. However, if the hearing officer determines that the school’s assessment is appropriate, the parent’s independent assessment will be considered but will not be paid for by the school (see Chapter 25 on Independent Educational Evaluations).

• Right to information about and participation in the development of the child’s IEP. The law provides that parents have the right to participate in the development of a child’s individualized education program. The law further requires the school to inform parents of their child’s right to a free appropriate public education and to provide information concerning all available alternative programs, both public and nonpublic.

• Consent of parents to perform assessment. California law provides that written parental consent must be obtained before an initial assessment of a child is conducted unless the school prevails in a due process hearing relating to such assessment.

• Consent of parents before placement in special education. The law provides that written parental consent must be obtained before a student is placed in a special education program.

For further information regarding due process hearings, contact the Office of Administrative Hearings.


APPENDIX E Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) Family Policy Compliance Office

http://familypolicy.ed.gov/ferpa-school-officials

GENERAL INFORMATION FOR K-12 SCHOOL OFFICIALS Question 1: What is FERPA? Answer: The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal law that affords parents the right to have access to their children’s education records, the right to seek to have the records amended, and the right to have some control over the disclosure of personally identifiable information from the education records. When a student turns 18 years old, or enters a postsecondary institution at any age, the rights under FERPA transfer from the parents to the student (“eligible student”). 20 U.S.C. § 1232g and the FERPA regulations are found at 34 CFR Part 99

Question 2: Do students under the age of 18 and not in college who are on their own and not in the physical custody of a parent or guardian have rights under FERPA? Answer: FERPA does not specifically afford minors who are separated from their parents the rights that are afforded to parents and eligible students under the law. However, schools may use their judgment in determining whether an unaccompanied minor is responsible enough to exercise certain privileges, such as inspecting and reviewing education records and providing consent for disclosure. 34 CFR § 99.5(b)

Question 3: What records are exempted from FERPA? Answer: Exempted from the definition of education records are those records which are kept in the sole possession of the maker of the records and are not accessible or revealed to any other person except a temporary substitute for the maker of the records. Once the contents

or information recorded in sole possession records is disclosed to any party other than a temporary substitute for the maker of the records, those records become education records subject to FERPA. Generally sole possession records are of the nature to serve as a “memory jogger” for the creator of the record. For example, if a school official has taken notes regarding telephone or face to face conversations, such notes could be sole possession records depending on the nature and content of the notes.

Question 4: Are educational agencies and institutions required to notify parents and eligible students of their rights under FERPA? Answer: Yes. Educational agencies and institutions must annually notify parents and eligible students of their rights under FERPA. Specifically, schools must notify parents and eligible students of the right: to inspect and review education records and the procedures to do so; to seek amendment of records the parent or eligible student believes are inaccurate and the procedures to so do; to consent to disclosures of education records, except to the extent that FERPA authorizes disclosure without consent; and to file a complaint with FPCO concerning potential violations. Postsecondary institutions are only required to notify eligible students of their rights under FERPA.

Question 5: Does an educational agency or institution have discretion over what education records it decides to create and keep? Answer: Yes. FERPA does not require schools to create education records nor does it require schools to maintain education records, unless there is an outstanding request by a parent or eligible student to inspect and review the records.

Question 6: To which educational agencies or institutions does FERPA apply? Answer: FERPA applies to educational agencies or institutions that receive funds from programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education. By “educational agencies or institutions” we mean public schools, school districts (or “local educational agencies” (LEAs)), and postsecondary institutions, such as colleges and universities. Private and parochial schools at the elementary and secondary level generally

http://familypolicy.ed.gov/ferpa-school-officials


do not receive such funding and are, therefore, not subject to FERPA.

Question 7: What is an Education Record? Answer: Education records are records that are directly related to a student and that are maintained by an educational agency or institution or a party acting for or on behalf of the agency or institution. These records include but are not limited to grades, transcripts, class lists, student course schedules, health records (at the K-12 level), student financial information (at the postsecondary level), and student discipline files. The information may be recorded in any way, including, but not limited to, handwriting, print, computer media, videotape, audiotape, film, microfilm, microfiche, and e-mail.

INSPECTION AND REVIEW OF EDUCATION RECORDS Question 1: How long does an educational agency or institution have to comply with a request to view records? Answer: FERPA requires that educational agencies and institutions comply with a request by a parent or eligible student for access to education records within a reasonable period of time, but not more than 45 days after receipt of a request. Some States have laws that may require that parents and eligible students be granted access in a shorter time period. 34 CFR § 99.10(b)

Question 2: Does a school have to explain or interpret education records when requested by a parent or eligible student? Answer: FERPA requires that an educational agency or institution respond to reasonable requests for explanations and interpretations of education records. 34 CFR § 99.10(c)

Question 3: Are law enforcement records protected under FERPA? Answer: “Law enforcement unit records” (i.e., records created by a law enforcement unit at the

educational agency or institution, created for a law enforcement purpose, and maintained by the law enforcement unit) are not “education records” subject to the privacy protections of FERPA. As such, the law enforcement unit may refuse to provide a parent or eligible student with an opportunity to inspect and review law enforcement unit records, and it may disclose law enforcement unit records to third parties without the parent or eligible student’s prior written consent.

CONSENT TO DISCLOSE PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION FROM EDUCATION RECORDS Question 1: What must a consent to disclose education records contain? Answer: FERPA requires that a consent for disclosure of education records be signed and dated, specify the records that may be disclosed, state the purpose of the disclosure, and identify the party or class of parties to whom the disclosure may be made. As such, oral consent for disclosure of information from education records would not meet FERPA’s consent requirements. 34 CFR § 99.30

Question 2: May an educational agency or institution disclose education records if they are involved in litigation against a parent of student or an eligible student? Answer: Yes, the educational agency or institution may disclose to the court the education records of the student that are relevant for the educational agency or institution to proceed with or defend against the legal action. 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(9)(iii)

Question 3: May an educational agency or institution disclose information over the phone? Answer: While FERPA does not specifically prohibit a school from disclosing personally identifiable information from a student’s education records over the telephone, it does require that the school use reasonable methods to identify and authenticate the identity of parents, students, school officials, and any other


parties to whom the school discloses personally identifiable information from education records. 34 CFR § 99.31(c)

Question 4: What constitutes de-identified records and information? Answer: Records and information are de-identified once all personally identifiable information has been removed including but not limited to any information that, alone or in combination is linkable to a specific student that a reasonable person in the school community, who does not have personal knowledge of the relevant circumstances, to identify the student with reasonable certainty.

Question 5: May parents or eligible students be provided access to education records that contain information on more than one student? Answer: If the education records of a student contain personally identifiable information on other students, the parent or eligible student may inspect or review or be informed of only the specific information about the student in question. 34 CFR § 99.12

DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION DESIGNATED AS DIRECTORY INFORMATION Question 1: Is it permissible to release GPA to honors organizations without consent? Answer: No. FERPA does not generally permit a school to disclose a student’s GPA without the parent’s or eligible student’s consent.

Question 2: I want to use online tool or application as part of my course. However, I am worried that it is a violation of FERPA. What should I do? Answer: A teacher should check with their school administration to see what has been defined as directory information. As long as using the application would not require disclosing more than directory information and none of the students have opted out of directory information, it would not be a violation of FERPA.

Question 3: May an educational agency or institution disclose directory information without prior consent? Answer: Education records that have been appropriately designated as "directory information" by the educational agency or institution may be disclosed without prior consent. See 34 CFR §§ 99.31(a)(11) and 99.37. FERPA defines directory information as information contained in an education record of a student that would not generally be considered harmful or an invasion of privacy if disclosed. 34 CFR § 99.3 FERPA provides that a school may disclose directory information if it has given public notice of the types of information which it has designated as "directory information," the parent or eligible student’s right to restrict the disclosure of such information, and the period of time within which a parent or eligible student has to notify the school in writing that he or she does not want any or all of those types of information designated as "directory information." 34 CFR § 99.37(a). A school is not required to inform former students or the parents of former students regarding directory information or to honor their request that directory information not be disclosed without consent. 34 CFR § 99.37(b). However, if a parent or eligible student, within the specified time period during the student's last opportunity as a student in attendance, requested that directory information not be disclosed, the school must honor that request until otherwise notified.

Question 4: May schools publish honors and awards received by a student? Answer: Schools may disclose honors and awards received by students if it has properly designated “honors and awards” as a category in its directory information policy and has followed the requirements in FERPA for notifying parents and/or eligible students about the policy.

Question 5: May a social security number or other student identification number be listed as directory information? Answer: A school may not designate a student’s social security number as directory information. However, directory information


may include a student’s user ID or other unique identifier used by the student to access or communicate in electronic systems, but only if the electronic identifier cannot be used to gain access to education records except when used in conjunction with one or more factors that authenticate the student’s identity, such as a personal identification number (PIN), password, or other factor known or possess only by the student or authorized user. 34 CFR § 99.3 “Directory information”

DISCLOSURE TO ORGANIZATIONS CONDUCTING STUDIES FOR OR ON BEHALF OF THE SCHOOL Question 1: May an educational agency or institution disclose personally identifiable information from students education records to third parties for the purpose of conducting a study on its behalf? Answer: FERPA contains an exception to its general consent rule under which an educational agency or institution may disclose personally identifiable information from education records without consent to organizations conducting studies for, or on its behalf. Studies must be only for the purpose of: developing, validating, or administering predictive tests; administering student aid programs; or improving instruction. A written agreement with the organization is required specifying the purposes of the study and the use and destruction of the information. 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(6)

Question 2: Must an educational agency or institution have a written agreement to disclose PII from education records without consent for the purposes of conducting a study or an audit or evaluation of an education program? Answer: Yes. Both the studies exception and the audit or evaluation exception specifically require that the parties execute a written agreement when disclosing PII from education records without consent. The mandatory elements of that agreement vary slightly between the two exceptions. See FPCO’s Guidance for Reasonable Methods and Written Agreements for more information regarding the mandatory elements for written agreements.

DISCLOSURE TO OFFICIALS FOR AUDIT OR EVALUATION PURPOSES Question 1: May an educational agency or institution disclose personally identifiable information from students education records for the purpose of a specified audit, evaluation, or for compliance and enforcement purposes? Answer: FERPA permits schools to disclose PII from students’ education records, without consent, to authorized representatives of State and local educational authorities, the Secretary of Education, the Comptroller General of the United States, and the Attorney General of the United States for specified purposes. Disclosures may be made under this exception as necessary in connection with the audit or evaluation of Federal or State supported education programs, or in connection with the enforcement of Federal legal requirements that relate to those program. 34 CFR §§ 99.31(a)(3) and 99.35.

Question 2: What is an education program? Answer: “Education program” is defined as any program principally engaged in the provision of education, including, but not limited to, early childhood education, elementary and secondary education, postsecondary education, special education, job training, career and technical education, and adult education, and any program that is administered by an educational agency or institution. 34 CFR § 99.3 “education program”

Question 3: Must an educational agency or institution have a written agreement to disclose PII from education records without consent for the purposes of conducting a study or an audit or evaluation of an education program? Answer: Yes. Both the studies exception and the audit or evaluation exception specifically require that the parties execute a written agreement when disclosing PII from education records without consent. The mandatory elements of that agreement vary slightly between the two exceptions. See FPCO’s Guidance for Reasonable Methods and Written Agreements for more information

http://familypolicy.ed.gov/sites/fpco.aem-tx.com/files/reasonablemtd_agreement.pdf





regarding the mandatory elements for written agreements.

DISCLOSURE IN CONNECTION WITH A HEALTH OR SAFETY EMERGENCY Question 1: May an educational agency or institution disclose personally identifiable information from students education records in order to address a disaster or other health or safety emergency? Answer: Under FERPA, school officials may disclose, without consent, personally identifiable information from students’ education records to appropriate parties (typically law enforcement officials, public health officials, trained medical personnel, and parents) in connection with an emergency if the knowledge of that information is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student other individuals.

DISCLOSURE OF SCHOOL OFFICIALS WITH A LEGITIMATE EDUCAITONAL INTEREST Question 1: Who is a “school official” under FERPA? Answer: A “school official” includes a teacher, school principal, president, chancellor, board member, trustee, registrar, counselor, admissions officer, attorney, accountant, human resources professional, information systems specialist, and support or clerical personnel. A contractor, consultant, volunteer, or other party to whom a school or institution has outsourced institutional services or functions may also be considered a “school official” provided that they are performing an institutional service or function for which the agency would otherwise use employees and is under the direct control of the agency or institution with respect to the use and maintenance of education records. 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1)(i)(B)

Question 2: Under FERPA, may an educational agency or institution disclose education records to any of its employees without consent? Answer: No. FERPA permits an educational agency or institution to disclose, without consent, personally identifiable information from

students’ education records only to school officials within the educational agency or institution that the educational agency or institution has determined to have legitimate educational interests in the information. 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(1). Generally, a school official has a legitimate educational interest if the official needs to review an education record in order to fulfill his or her professional responsibility.

Question 3: What must educational agencies or institutions do to ensure that only school officials with a legitimate educational interest see protected education records? Answer: An educational agency or institution must use reasonable methods to ensure that school officials obtain access to only those education records in which they have legitimate educational interests. An educational agency or institution that does not use physical or technological access controls must ensure that its administrative policy for controlling access to education records is effective and that it remains in compliance with the legitimate educational interest requirement.

DISCLOSURE TO OFFICIALS OF OTHER SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONS Question 1: Does FERPA require a school to transfer education records to a new school? Answer: The disclosure to officials of another school in which a student seeks or intends to enroll is permitted by FERPA, not required. However, State and local laws may require that such disclosures be made.

DISCLOSURE TO A VICTIM OF AN ALLEGED PERPETRATOR OF A CRIME OF VIOLENCE OR A NON-FORCIBLE SEX OFFENSE Question 1: May a postsecondary institution disclose information about a disciplinary proceeding to the victim of a crime of violence or a non-forcible sex offense? Answer: Yes, a postsecondary institution may disclose only the final results of the disciplinary proceeding to a victim of an alleged perpetrator of a crime of violence or a non-forcible sex


offense. In disclosures to the victim, the institution may disclose the final results of the disciplinary proceeding regardless of whether the institution concluded a violation was committed.

DISCLOSURE TO COMPLY WITH A JUDICIAL ORDER OR SUBPOENA Question 1: May an educational agency or institution disclose education records without consent if ordered to by a court? Answer: Yes, an educational agency or institution may disclose personally identifiable information from education records in order to comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena. However, the agency or institution must make a reasonable effort to notify the parent or eligible student of the order or subpoena in advance of compliance so that the parent or eligible student may seek protective action unless the disclosure meets a specific exception found at 34 CFR § 99.31(a)(9)(ii). These exceptions include when a court has ordered that either a federal grand jury subpoena not be disclosed, a court or other issuing agency has ordered that a subpoena for law enforcement purposes not be disclosed, or when an ex parte court order has been obtained by the United States Attorney General concerning certain investigations or prosecutions.


APPENDIX F Assistive Technology REQUIREMENTS

Question 1: What is Assistive Technology? Answer: IDEA defines an assistive technology device as any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability. Neither the statute nor the regulations defines assistive technology in more detail. The regulations stated the definition of assistive technology device does not list specific devices, nor would it be practical or possible to include an exhaustive list of assistive technology devices. Whether an augmentative communication device, playback devices, or other devices could be considered an assistive technology device for a child depends on whether the device is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of a child with a disabilities, and whether the child’s IEP team determines that the child needs the device in order to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE).

Question 2: What is the responsibility of the school district in regards to assistive technology? Answer: The IDEA mandates that districts provide assistive technology to all students with disabilities if it is needed for them to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The IEP team is charged with the responsibility for determining a student’s individual need for assistive technology in order to benefit from his or her education and to have access to the general education curriculum. If it is determined that assistive technology device and/or services are necessary, the IEP must specify the devices and services.

Question 3: What is an assistive technology service? Answer: According to the IDEA, an assistive technology service is “any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an assistive technology device.” Examples of assistive technology services include the following: (1) assistive

technology evaluation; (2) “purchasing, leasing, or otherwise providing for the acquisition of” needed assistive technology devices; (3) “selecting, designing, fitting, customizing, adapting, applying, maintaining, repairing, or replacing assistive technology devices;” (4) coordinating assistive technology devices with other “therapies, interventions, or services;” (5) training for the child with a disability or, if appropriate, the child’s family; and (6) training for educators, service providers, employees, and others “who provide services to, employ, or are otherwise substantially involved in the major life activities of the child.”

FUNDING: RESPONSIBILITIES & RESOURCES Question 1: Are schools required to pay for assistive technology devices and services? Answer: It is the responsibility of the school district to provide the devices, services, and programs identified in the IEP. The school district may pay for the devices, services, or programs itself, utilize other resources to provide and/or pay for the device and/or services, or cooperatively fund the device(s) and/or services. Other resources may include but are not limited to Medicaid, foundations, fraternal organizations, church or social groups, charitable organizations, businesses, and individuals.

Question 2: Can school districts require the parents to pay for assistive technology device(s) or service(s) identified in the student’s IEP or require the parents to use their own private health insurance to pay for the device and/or service? Answer: The “free” in “Free Appropriate Public Education” is significant regarding students with disabilities who may require assistive technology devices or services. As stated in IDEA and its regulations, all special education and related services identified in the student’s IEP must be provided “at no cost to the parents.” The term “free” is interpreted broadly and goes far beyond the simple paying of deductibles and co-payment. The courts have interpreted “free” to apply to but not be limited to future insurability, depletion of maximum lifetime caps, raised premiums, discontinuation of policies, and pre-existing condition exclusions. Parents’ health insurance and/or Medicaid may be used to pay


for assistive technology devices and services. However, parents must give permission to use their private insurance and Medicaid.

Question 3: Must the school district assume financial responsibility for the purchase of assistive technology devices and services if they are listed in the IEP? Answer: The school district must assume financial responsibility for the purchase of assistive technology devices and services that are identified by the IEP team unless the cost is covered by third party benefits or insurance coverage and the parents agree to use such coverage to pay the cost, or a donation to the school district is made. School districts may seek other sources of funding. However, the provision of assistive technology devices and services as determined necessary by the IEP team must not be delayed by efforts to obtain outside funding and/or donations. If parents utilize their insurance coverage, then the parents must not be responsible for paying their insurance deductible and must not be compelled to have homeowners insurance to cover the assistive technology device. In short, there must be no cost to the parents.

Question 4: Are there other options for school districts to consider in lieu of purchasing the assistive technology device? Answer: Yes. There are times when the outright purchase of devices is not necessary or even advisable. In instances such as these, school districts might consider rental or long-term lease/purchase options. Device rentals or long-term lease/purchase options are not intended to be less costly than purchase. There are certain advantages worth considering depending on the individual needs of the student. For example, renting equipment might be a reasonable strategy if the child’s condition is considered temporary; if the child’s condition is expected to improve or deteriorate; or, when it is necessary to try-out the equipment before purchase for the student. Long-term leasing or lease/purchase agreements also have potential benefits for schools which include no obligation on behalf of the school to purchase the device; reduction of obsolete inventory; flexible leasing terms; use of equipment without a lump sum purchase; upgrading of equipment as more improved technology becomes available; and, upgrading of equipment as the student’s needs change.

Question 5: Can school districts share the funding responsibilities of providing assistive technology devices and services? Answer: Yes. The practice is especially appropriate for children with disabilities who are transitioning from Birth to Three programs into public school programs or transitioning from public school to adult services through Rehabilitation Services. Ownership of the device is an important issue to consider by IEP teams especially during times of transition.

Question 6: Is the school district obligated to provide “state-of-the-art” technology for students with disabilities? Answer: The school district is not obligated to provide “state-of-the-art” technology if the student’s needs do not require it or if the student is unable to utilize it; however, if a student needs “state-of-the-art” device or service to receive a free appropriate public education, then the district must provide it. The IEP team must make a determination as to whether an assistive technology device or service is necessary to enable the student to access the general education curriculum in the least restrictive environment and to provide FAPE, then the district must provide the required device or service regardless of cost. However, if a less expensive device or service would accomplish the same goals, the IEP team is under no obligation to choose the more expensive option.

Question 7: Who owns the assistive technology purchased for an individual student? Answer: If the school purchased the device, it is the property of the school. If the assistive technology device was purchased using the student’s Medicaid or private insurance funds, the device belongs to the student. If the device was donated, ownership would be determined by the conditions of the donorship. If the parents or third party pays for a portion of a device, and the school pays a portion of a device it is advisable that a written agreement be drawn up between the school and the parents regarding ownership.

Question 8: Can school districts require students to bring a family-owned assistive technology device to school?


Answer: No. There is no barrier to a student bringing his or her assistive technology device from home to school, but schools have no authority to mandate that this occur. If the family agrees to allow the device to travel from home to school, then a discussion regarding liability while the device is transported to or is at school needs to be held and recorded in the IEP. If a separate contract provision is necessary for the device to be covered under the family’s insurance, then the school district should reimburse the family for the cost of that additional coverage. The family can and may insist that schools provide any necessary device as part of the student’s IEP even if the student has identical device at home.

Question 9: Is a school district responsible for retaining, repairing, or replacing assistive technology devices? Answer: If purchased or secured by the school district, then the school district should retain, repair, or replace assistive technology devices, as long as the student requires them in order to receive FAPE. It is suggested that school administrators examine all warranties and contracts that may accompany specific devices. Additionally, if the student’s family has provided an assistive technology device that the IEP team has identified as necessary for the provision of FAPE and has included in the IEP, then the school district, with the agreement of the family, may use the device at school and is responsible to repair or replace the device if necessary.

Question 10: What are the responsibilities of the student, educators and parents in the maintenance and repair of assistive technology devices and reporting broken devices? Answer: It is the joint responsibility of the parent, student, and school personnel to take reasonable care of assistive technology devices. The IEP should identify methods for reporting problems and completing repairs prior to using the assistive technology device.

Question 11: If an assistive technology device is lost or damaged beyond repair, who replaces the device? Answer: If an assistive technology device is necessary for the student’s IEP to be implemented, the school district will have to

replace a broken device. If the device is broken at home through negligence, the parents could be held responsible for the repair costs. The school district is responsible to arrange for the repair or replacement of assistive technology devices. The district should ensure that proper safeguards are taken to protect the device if the student has a history of losing or damaging assistive technology devices. This would be considered an assistive technology service.

Question 12: Is the school liable for family owned assistive technology devices used at school to implement the student’s IEP? Answer: While the IDEA does not specify the responsibility of the school in such cases, State law could potentially impose liability on the school depending on the facts of the situation. The school district should take proper precautions to protect the equipment while it is in school buildings or being transported between home and school.

Question 13: What provisions could be made for the student while an assistive technology device is being repaired? Answer: During the developing of the IEP, the IEP team should identify the steps to be taken if the device needs repairs; how a substitute device will be provided; and other temporary options that would offer an acceptable substitute to the student’s device.

Question 14: What is important to know about a warranty? Answer: The school should check the length of the warranty and find out exactly what is covered and, equally important, what is not covered. One-year warranties are common. Extended warranties and service contracts will probably be available. For some devices, the manufacturer suggests annual maintenance. School districts should weigh the cost of additional or extended warranties with the cost of the device. The manufacturer’s warranty should be reviewed prior to purchasing an assistive technology device and before making any repairs or modifications to the device. In some case, warranties may be voided if persons other than the manufacturer or authorized service representatives attempt to repair a device.


Question 15: Should assistive technology devices be insured? Answer: It is the school district’s decision to carry insurance. School district insurance policies may cover an assistive technology device purchased by the district for the student use or may offer additional coverage that includes assistive technology devices. Assistive technology devices purchased by funding sources other than the school may or may not be covered while the student is on school premises or involved in school activities. It is important for school staff to investigate the district’s insurance to determine what the policy currently covers and whether or not the policy insures against loss or damage of assistive technology devices.

Question 16: Are school districts responsible for customization, maintenance, repair, and replacement of assistive technology devices? Answer: Assistive technology services such as customization, maintenance, repair and replacement are included considerations in the acquisition of equipment or devices purchased/provided by the school district. It is the responsibility of the school district to ensure that students who require assistive technology devices also receive the necessary assistive technology services that will make the technology meaningful to the student. This requirement reflects the “individualization” of a specific type of device. If family owned assistive technology is used by the school, is listed in the IEP, and is necessary for providing FAPE, the school district is also responsible for maintenance, repair, and replacement. Responsibilities for these services should be identified in the IEP.

Question 17: What is the responsibility of a school district when parents elect to purchase a needed device on their own and the family-owned device is written into the IEP? Answer: Federal law is silent on this issue. However, it is reasonable to expect a school district to assume liability for an assistive technology device that is family-owned, but used to implement a student’s IEP, either in school or at home. In the absence of the family assuming financial responsibility, a school district would be required to provide and maintain a needed assistive device that was written into the IEP. In

circumstances where the family has provided the original device, it is recommended that the school district clarify in its agreements with the family whether the family retains ownership of the device in the case of replacement.

AT: TRAINING ISSUES Question 1: In addition to the student, who else should receive training on how to use the assistive technology devices? Answer: Use of assistive technology without integration into the student’s individual goals and objectives will result in less than optimal outcomes for the student. Individuals who live, work, or play with the student should be a part of this process. For a student with a disability it is often not enough if the classroom teacher and specialists are the only ones trained in the use of the device. If the device is to be meaningfully integrated into the student’s life and general education curriculum, significant people such as family members and peers need to be familiar with the assistive technology.

Question 2: How can a staff member receive individualized training for a specific need? Answer: In general, if the IEP team specifies the use of an assistive technology device, it is the district’s responsibility to train appropriate staff members and family members, depending on the individual needs of the student. In addition to a district-wide professional development plan, special circumstances might arise when it becomes necessary for individuals involved with a specific student to learn how to operate and utilize a device. It is the district’s responsibility to either bring in a trainer or offer release time, tuition reimbursement, or pay conference fees for staff to get the necessary training elsewhere. Any training needs should be specified in the IEP.

Question 3: What kind of training and technical assistance should be provided to families, and professionals? Answer: Depending on the technology and the involvement of the family, peers, and professionals with the student, training and technical assistance should include, but not be limited to, providing information and training about:

• The device and how it works;


• Programming and setting up the device; • Recognizing and fixing minor problems; • Integrating the device into the student’s

life at home; • Integrating the device into the student’s

education goals and objectives; • Maintenance of the device(s); and • Resources within the local community for

repair services.

AT: RELATED ISSUES Question 1: Can the IEP team refuse to consider assistive technology on the IEP? Answer: No. All IEP teams have the responsibility to consider a student’s need for assistive technology devices and services, and for specifying those devices and services. Therefore, it is important that IEP teams are informed of the requirement to determine if a student needs an assistive technology device and services and the need for an assistive technology evaluation to assist in making the determination.

Question 2: How is assistive technology integrated into the delivery of the general education curriculum? Answer: The IEP team needs to discuss how the student will use the device and how it will be integrated into the general education curriculum. The IEP team should identify in the IEP how the student will use the device. This information must be shared with the general classroom teachers, at least one of whom is a member of the IEP team, so that they are aware of how it is to be used.

Question 3: How can continuity be achieved in the student’s program with regard to assistive technology devices and services from classroom to classroom, teacher to teacher, school to school, year to year? Answer: Each student’s IEP must be reviewed no less than annually. At the review, the IEP team should discuss and identify personnel training needs as they relate to the student’s movement through the school program. The school should develop policies and procedures to ensure that involved teachers are familiar with the student’s assistive technology needs and sue of the device(s). This will help provide continuity. For example, school districts could assign case managers to oversee this process.

Policies and procedures could also outline the process for providing training for new staff that will interact with the student and need to be knowledgeable about the device(s).

Question 4: Can school administrators instruct personnel not to include assistive technology in the IEP? Answer: No. The IEP team determines a student’s need for assistive technology devices and services. A school may not prevent IEP teams from identifying a student’s need for assistive technology.

Question 5: How is timely manner defined in regards to obtaining an assistive technology device? Answer: Once an assistive technology device is determined necessary for the student, the district must implement procedures necessary for obtaining the device without unnecessary delay. When a delay is anticipated (e.g., equipment is on backorder from the company) the school should inform the parent and implement procedures to ensure that the student has access to the instructional program. It may be possible for the district to rent, borrow, or lease an appropriate device in the interim.

Question 6: When a student moves from school to school within the same district, does the district-purchased device follow the student? Answer: If the device is included in a student’s IEP, it must be provided in whichever school the student attends in that district. The same device may not necessarily follow the student from one school to the next, but a device that fulfills the assistive technology needs identifies in the IEP would need to be provided.

Question 7: When a student moves from one school district to a different school district, does the assistive technology device that was purchased by District A follow the student to District B? Answer: Since District A owns the device, it may keep the device for use by other students; or District A may decide to transfer or sell the device to District B.


Question 8: When a student moves from one level of schooling to another, such as from elementary school to middle school, does the device follow the student? Answer: If an assistive technology device is necessary to fulfill the requirements of a student’s IEP, such a device must be provided in the school the student attends. The same device may not necessarily follow the student from one school to another, but a comparable device, which fulfills the IEP requirements, would need to be provided in the new school.

Question 9: What happens to assistive technology devices when students leave the school system? Answer: If the school district purchased the device, the device is the property of the school. The school could keep the device for use by other students, sell it, or decide to transfer the device to another district in which the student enrolls. If the family purchased the device, it is the property of the student and the family. For secondary students, this issue should be addressed in the transition plan.

Question 10: If a student requires the use of an assistive technology device(s), what happens to the device(s) when the student graduates? Answer: Transition planning for technology users is particularly challenging because there is no legal requirement for the transfer of ownership for an assistive technology device from the school to the individual student or to an adult agency upon graduation. Under state and federal law, public schools assume financial responsibility for the assistive technology device and services, but as a student transitions to adult life, the financial responsibility ends, and possession of the device reverts to the school. While there are no formal state policies in place, there is nothing to prohibit creative arrangements that support a seamless transfer of technology as a student graduates. One strategy to consider is collaboration with an adult agency to purchase the technology while the student is still in special education or to purchase it from the school district upon graduation.

Question 11: If a student needs a computer, can a school-owned computer be used in the lab or classroom? Answer: Yes, if the student has access to the equipment as needed. If the student does not have the necessary access, then the appropriate equipment should be purchased for the student’s use. The IEP team will decide as a group the need and use of computers on a case-by-case basis.

Question 12: Can more than one student use an assistive technology device? Answer: Yes, an assistive technology device may be shared if it is the property of the school and each student who requires use of the device has access to it as needed.

Mission Statement


Glossary of Educational Terms and Acronyms

AAC Augmentative & Alternative Communication AAD Adaptive Assistive Devices ABA Applied Behavior Analysis

ACMT Advanced Certified Music Therapist ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ADA Average Daily Attendance ADD Attention Deficit Disorder

ADHD Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution ALJ Administrative Law Judge APE Adapted Physical Education API Academic Performance Index

ARRA American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 ASD Autism Spectrum Disorder

ASHA American Speech Language Hearing Association ASL American Sign Language AT Assistive Technology

AUT Autism AYP Adequate Yearly Progress

BASC Behavioral Assessment Scale for Children BCBA Board Certified Behavior Analyst

BD Behavioral Disorder BER Behavioral Emergency Report BIP Behavioral Intervention Plan BSP Behavior Support Plan CAA California Alternate Assessment

CAASPP CA Assessment of Student Performance & Progress CAC Community Advisory Committee

CAHSEE California High School Exit Exam CALPADS CA Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System

CAPA California Alternate Performance Assessment CAPD Central Auditory Processing Disorder

CASEMIS CA Special Education Management Information System CASP California Association of School Psychologists CBA Curriculum-Based Assessment CBM Curriculum-Based Measurement CCR California Code of Regulations CCS California Children’s Services

CCSS Common Core State Standards CDE California Department of Education CDS County/District/School (Code) CEC Council for Exceptional Children

CELDT California English Language Development Test CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CHSPE California High School Proficiency Exam CICO Check In Check Out CMA California Modified Assessment CMH County Department of Mental Health CMT Certified Music Therapist COE County Office of Education

COTA Certified Occupational Therapy Assistant CP Cerebral Palsy

CSBA California School Boards Association CSDR California School for the Deaf, Riverside CSHA California Speech Language & Hearing Association CST California Standards Test CTA California Teachers Association CTC California Commission on Teacher Credentialing DB Deaf-Blind

DHH Deaf and Hard of Hearing DLL Dual Language Learner DPR Daily Progress Report

DSM-V Diagnostic & Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

DR Department of Rehabilitation DTT Discrete Trial Teaching EAP Early Assessment Program EC California Education Code ECE Early Childhood Education ED Emotional Disturbance EIS Early Intervention Services ELA English-Language Arts ELD English Language Development ELL English Language Learner

ESEA Elementary & Secondary Education Act ESD Extended School Day ESL English as a Second Language ESY Extended School Year

FAPE Free Appropriate Public Education FBA Functional Behavioral Assessment

FERB Functional Equivalent Replacement Behavior FERPA Family Educational Rights & Privacy Act

FFH Foster Family Home FI Family Infant

FPCO Family Policy Compliance Office GED General Education Development HI Hearing Impairment

HOUSSE High Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation HQT Highly Qualified Teacher (as defined by ESEA) IA Instructional Assistant

IAES Interim Alternative Educational Setting ID Intellectual Disability IEE Independent Educational Evaluation

IDEA Individuals with Disabilities Education Act IEP Individualized Education Program IFSP Individualized Family Service Plan IHO Impartial Hearing Officer IQ Intelligence Quotient IRC Inland Regional Center ISIS Individual Student Information System ISP Individualized Service Plan ISS In School Suspension ITP Individualized Transition Plan

IWEN Individual with Exceptional Needs LCI Licensed Children’s Institution LD Learning Disability LEA Local Education Agency LEP Limited English Proficiency LIFE Linking Individuals, Families & Educators LRE Least Restrictive Environment LSH Language-Speech & Hearing MD Manifestation Determination

MDT Multidisciplinary Team MH Multi-Handicapped MIS Management Information System MTU Medical Therapy Unit NEP Non-English Proficient

NCLB No Child Left Behind NPA Nonpublic Agency NPS Nonpublic School O&M Orientation & Mobility OAH Office of Administrative Hearings OCD Obsessive Compulsive Disorder OCR U.S. Office of Civil Rights ODD Oppositional Defiant Disorder OHI Other Health Impairment OI Orthopedic Impairment


Glossary of Educational Terms and Acronyms

OSEP Office of Special Education Programs OSERS Office of Special Education & Rehabilitation Services

OT Occupational Therapy PBIS Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports PDD Pervasive Developmental Disorder PECS Picture Exchange Communication System PFT Physical Fitness Testing PI Program Improvement

PLOP Present Levels of Performance PS Program Specialist PT Physical Therapy

PWN Prior Written Notice RSP Resource Specialist Program RTC Residential Treatment Center RTI Response to Intervention SAI Specialized Academic Instruction

SAIG Social Academic Instruction Group SARB School Attendance Review Board SAS Self-Assessment Survey

SBAC Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium SBE State Board of Education SCIA Special Circumstance Instructional Assistance SDC Special Day Class SDQ Strengths & Difficulties Questionnaire SEA State Educational Agency SED Serious Emotional Disturbance

SELPA Special Education Local Plan Area SH Severely Handicapped SI Sensory Integration

SLD Specific Learning Disability SLP Speech-Language Pathologist

SLPA Speech-Language Pathologist Assistant SMART Specific Measurable Attainable Relevant Timely SPED Special Education SRSS Student Risk Screening Scale SSIS Social Skills Improvement System SSPI State Superintendent of Public Instruction SSRS Social Skills Rating Scale SST Student Study Team

STAR Standardized Testing & Reporting STS Standards-Based Tests in Spanish

SWIS School-Wide Information System TBI Traumatic Brain Injury TIPS Team-Initiated Problem Solving TPP Transition Partnership Program UCP Uniform Complaint Procedures VI Visual Impairment

WASC Western Association of Schools & Colleges WIOA Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act WAI WorkAbility I

This referral handbook was developed by the California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions (CAHELP), a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), to assist participating local education agencies (LEAs) in the Desert/Mountain Special Education Local Plan Area and the Desert/Mountain Charter Special Education Local Plan Area (hereinafter referred to as the SELPA) in the referral processes for special education and related services and behavioral health programs. Note: All services may not be available in all areas. Please check with the Program Specialist assigned to your LEA with any questions regarding the referral process.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 2

Table of Contents

Audiological Assessments ........................................... Section 1 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 3-4 Annual ................................................................................................ Pages 5-6

Assistive Technology ................................................... Section 2 Low Incidence Referral .......................................................................... Pages 7-8 Non-Low Incidence Referral ................................................................. Pages 9-10

Behavioral Health Counseling ...................................... Section 3 School-Aged Treatment Services (SATS) (Ages 7-22) .......................... Pages 11 Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment (SART) (Ages 0-6) ....... Pages 12 Student Assistance Program (SAP) ...................................................... Pages 13

Nonpublic Agency Behavioral Intervention .................. Section 4 Assessment Only .................................................................................. Pages 14-15 Supports Only ...................................................................................... Pages 16 Assessment and Supports ...................................................................... Pages 17-18

Nonpublic School.......................................................... Section 5 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 19-20 Transfer Referral .................................................................................. Pages 21

Occupational Therapy (OT) .......................................... Section 6 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 22-23 Transfer Referral .................................................................................. Pages 24

Physical Therapy (PT) .................................................. Section 7 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 25-26 Transfer Referral .................................................................................. Pages 27

Residential Placement ................................................. Section 8 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 28-29 Transfer Referral .................................................................................. Pages 30

Special Health Care Services ....................................... Section 9 Initial Referral ...................................................................................... Pages 31 Transfer Referral .................................................................................. Pages 32

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 3

The SELPA Audiological Program provides students with audiological assessment and services that will assist them in making the best use of their hearing and help them participate and progress in the general education curriculum.

Local Education Agency (LEA) Responsibility

1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the

team’s decision to refer the student for an Audiological Assessment. 2. Complete the Initial Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form (D/M 108) and

obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education.


4. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested.


6. LEAs are encouraged to have assessment plans signed close to the date of their LEA audiology evaluation date and within the required time frame.

7. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name as the SELPA/Pacific Hearing Services. The disclosing agency will vary depending on whether it is a physician, medical center, or audiologist.

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA. D/M 108 Initial Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an audiological

assessment LEA’s hearing screening form that documents a minimum of two repeated failures

on threshold tests or previous audiological assessment reports and/or audiograms for students who have an identified hearing loss

Timeline for Assessment

The audiological assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 4

An Audiology Assessment Calendar is published on an annual basis at the beginning of each school year. The calendar lists the assessment dates and referral due dates for each LEA within the SELPA. The calendar can be found on the SELPA website at www.dmselpa.org. For students who require services outside of the regularly scheduled LEA visit, services may be coordinated between the SELPA and the LEA. Arrangements may be made for students to be served at the school site, at a nearby LEA, the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC), or at the service provider’s office, whichever is available and appropriate. Please contact the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA for assistance.

Timeline for Services

Upon completion of the audiological assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the agency that conducted the assessment or by the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA. The director of special education should reconvene the IEP team to review the findings and recommendations of the assessment, consider the educational impact, and determine whether or not audiological services are needed.

• If ongoing audiological follow-up is recommended, code 720 should be listed under the Special Education and Related Services section of the IEP form.

• If it is decided that classroom amplification equipment is needed and the student agrees to wear it, a request for a proposal of the specific equipment should be made to the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA.

• If a profound hearing loss has been found, the deaf disability code (020) should be listed under the Eligibility section of the IEP form.

• If a mild to severe hearing loss has been found, the hard of hearing disability code (030) should be listed under the Eligibility section of the IEP form.

• If the disability is due to a hearing loss, the Low Incidence Disability box on the IEP form should be checked.

• If the hearing loss is not the primary disability, it may be listed as the secondary disability.

• If recommended and agreed upon, classroom amplification equipment should also be noted under Assistive Technology on the IEP form (D/M 68D).

• If the student is to receive amplification equipment for the first time, goals should be included for mastering equipment utilization, care, and operation.


© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 5

Students who have previously been referred and evaluated for audiological services are eligible for annual audiological assessments.

Local Education Agency (LEA) Responsibility LEAs may request an annual audiological assessment by following the procedure listed below. It is not necessary that the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team convene for this type of referral.

1. Complete the Annual Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form (D/M 108A). Please DO NOT complete the Initial Request for Audiological Evaluation/Services form (D/M 108) for annual referrals.

1. Include information that is related to the school of attendance, program

placement, and services the student is currently receiving. 2. Include behavior and/or academic successes or challenges. 3. Include information regarding the use and functioning of equipment such

as hearing aids and/or FM systems. 4. Include medical information related to the student’s hearing.

2. Complete the Assessment Plan form (D/M 66) and obtain the parent/guardian

signature.

1. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested. Most often the “other” box is checked followed by the statement, “Audiological assessment to be completed by SELPA contracted audiologist.”


3. LEAs are encouraged to have the assessment plans signed close to the date of their LEA audiology evaluation date and within the required time frame.

3. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and

obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name as the SELPA/Pacific Hearing Services. The disclosing agency will vary depending on whether it is a physician, medical center, or audiologist.

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA. D/M 108A Annual Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 6

D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form Timeline for Assessment

The audiological assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped. An Audiology Assessment Calendar is published on an annual basis at the beginning of each school year. The calendar lists the assessment dates and referral due dates for each LEA within the SELPA. The calendar may be found on the SELPA website at www.dmselpa.org. For students who require services outside of the regularly scheduled LEA visit, services may be coordinated between the SELPA and the LEA. Arrangements may be made for students to be served at the school site, at a nearby LEA, the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) or at the service provider’s office, whichever is available and appropriate. Please contact the Audiology Services Program Specialist at the SELPA for assistance.



© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 7

Assistive Technology refers to a device or service that can be used as a tool by students with disabilities to achieve or maintain function. The IDEA and California law require that Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams consider whether students need assistive technology devices or services when developing IEPs. Assistive Technology (AT) relates to the tools required to maintain, improve, or increase functional capabilities to bridge the gap between student’s performance and the demands of the curriculum. AT devices and services are defined in the IDEA as:

• Any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability.

• Any service that directly assists a child with a disability in the selection, acquisition, or use of an AT device. This includes evaluation; providing for the acquisition of AT equipment; selecting, designing, interventions or services with AT devices; and training or technical assistance for the child, family, and other professionals who work with the child.

Low incidence disability is defined in California Education Code § 56026.5 as a severe disabling condition with an expected incidence rate of less than one percent of the total statewide enrollment in kindergarten through grade 12. For purposes of this definition, severe disabling conditions are hearing impairments, vision impairments, and severe orthopedic impairments, or any combination thereof. For purposes of this definition, vision impairments do not include disabilities within the function of vision specified in Section 56338.




3. Complete the Assessment Plan form (D/M 66) and obtain the parent/guardian signature. • The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the

type of assessment(s) requested. • The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the

Parental Authorization section of form D/M 66. 4. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and

obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency’s name, if known. If not, leave the field blank.




© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 8

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA. D/M 127 Assistive Technology Assessment Referral form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an Assistive

Technology Assessment Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for an

Assistive Technology Assessment Any additional supporting information


Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA will assign the assessment to an independent assessor who will coordinate the assessment through the contact person named on the referral form (D/M 127).


Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the agency that conducted the assessment or the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not AT services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. For students with a documented low incidence disability:

• IEP team must note the need for the low incidence equipment on the student’s IEP, and link one or more of the student’s annual goals to the use of that specialized equipment.

• Complete SELPA Low Incidence Pre-Approval/Reimbursement Request form (D/M 86). Director of special education must sign form D/M 86 before the packet is submitted to the SELPA.

• Submit the completed form D/M 86 signed by the director of special education with a copy of the current IEP documenting the student’s disability and goal for use of low incidence equipment to the Accounting Technician, SELPA Business Office.






© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 9





4. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested. Write Assistive Technology Assessment on the line for “other.”



Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA. D/M 127 Assistive Technology Assessment Referral form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for an Assistive

Technology Assessment Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for an

Assistive Technology Assessment Any additional supporting information


Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA will determine whether to conduct the assessment using a multi-disciplinary team approach or assign the assessment to an independent assessor who will coordinate the assessment through the contact person named on the referral form (D/M 127). All assessments must be completed within 60) days.


Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the consultant or agency that conducted the assessment or the Assistive Technology Program Specialist at the SELPA with a request to schedule an







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 10

IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not AT services or devices/equipment are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes or under the IEP Consideration of Special Factors form (D/M 68D page 1) and/or in the Supplementary Aids and Supports form (D/M 68D page 2).

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 11

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) provides individual, group, and family counseling services for children and youth ages seven to 22. The DMCC accepts Medi-Cal, IEHP, TriCare, Pacific Care, Molina, and cash on a sliding scale for services provided. The goal of the DMCC is to assist clients in developing skills to reach their full potential. Referrals may be made through the child’s school, parents, physicians, and/or guardians. The DMCC provides School-Aged Treatment Services (SATS) medication support and management upon referral from the treating therapist to the DMCC medical doctor. SATS are primarily provided at each child’s school, but are also offered in the home, clinic, and community as needed. The DMCC also provides Screening, Assessment, Referral, and Treatment (SART) for children birth to six years old as well as Therapeutic Behavioral Services (TBS), and/or Children’s Intensive Services (CIS). For more information, please contact the DMCC.

Local Education Agency (LEA) Responsibility Complete the Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) with as much detail as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator.

Forward the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment

Upon receipt of the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter (up to three times) to schedule the assessment intake meeting. An intervention specialist or behavioral health counselor will be assigned to conduct the assessment. If no response from the parent/guardian is received by the third letter, the referral will be closed.


• If services are not deemed appropriate, the referral will be closed. • If services are deemed appropriate, a clinician will be assigned and services will

begin. • The DMCC provides a monthly report to the directors of special education. The

report includes a list of students who are currently served by the DMCC as well as an update for each referral that is in process.

http://dmselpa.org/resources/dmcc100A_rev0714.pdf



© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 12

The Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment (SART) program utilizes a team of highly qualified professionals to screen, assess, refer, and treat a child. San Bernardino County has collaboratively developed a program designed for children birth to six years of age who may have been prenatally exposed to drugs, alcohol, and/or violence. The SART program also addresses concerns with children experiencing behavior problems and difficulties maintaining appropriate behaviors in pre-school settings and the child’s home. The SART program offers a comprehensive screening process, assessment, and appropriate referrals to excellent treatment to improve overall functioning of the child. The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) provides medication support and management upon referral from the treating therapist to the DMCC medical doctor.

Local Education Agency (LEA) Responsibility Complete the SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B) with as much information as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator.

Forward the completed SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment

Upon receipt of the completed SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100B), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter and send the Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social Emotional in order to gather more information regarding the parent/guardian’s concerns. A DMCC Clinical Nurse will be assigned to contact the parent/guardian and provide case management throughout the assessment process.





http://dmselpa.org/resources/DMCCForm100B_rev0714.pdf




© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 13

The Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) Student Assistance Program (SAP) serves students, their families, and the school community. Students who are dealing with non-academic barriers to learning are the primary target for SAP services. Students are referred by staff, parents, or concerned others to the program. Students may also self-refer. The purpose of SAP is to:

• To reduce the risk factors, barriers, and stressors of kids, youth, and their families. • To provide appropriate strategies, interventions, and activities to school staff and families

that increase their knowledge of social, emotional, and behavioral issues. • To increase student awareness of the issues they face daily, including the social emotional

choices that impact their lives. • To build protective supports for students and their families that include significant

connections to others, training, and education.

Local Education Agency (LEA) Responsibility Complete the Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) with as much detail as possible and obtain the signatures of the parent/guardian and the school administrator.

Forward the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A) to the attention of the Director of the DMCC. Timeline for Assessment

Upon receipt of the completed Referral for Behavioral Health Services form (DMCC 100A), the DMCC will contact the parent/guardian by letter (up to three times) to schedule the assessment intake meeting. An intervention specialist or behavioral health counselor will be assigned to conduct the assessment. If no response from the parent/guardian is received by the third letter, the referral will be closed.








© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 14









Forward the following completed and signed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Cover letter requesting a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) (Note: the

director and the NPA determine the maximum number of hours needed to conduct assessment). Please indicate which NPA the LEA is selecting to complete the FBA.

D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for a behavioral

intervention assessment Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for a

behavioral intervention assessment Other assessments (private evaluations, Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical

Therapy (PT), etc.) Behavior plans (original and revised versions) Incident reports Discipline reports/log


Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program





© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 15

Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to conduct the assessment. The ISA will be circulated for required signatures by the SELPA and the NPA provider. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to conduct the assessment. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA. Upon completion of the assessment, the NPA will send the written report to the director of special education for the LEA and the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not behavioral intervention supports/services are warranted. The IEP meeting will be scheduled within the 60 day timeline. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the goals and services will be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the service code number 535 for behavioral intervention services and/or supervision, the class number for each service, provider code for the NPA (400), projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an ISA and forward it to the appropriate NPA for signature who will then initiate services.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 16


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for behavioral intervention supports.


Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Cover letter requesting the addition of Nonpublic Agency (NPA) behavioral

intervention supports and the name of the selected NPA D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for behavioral

intervention supports that includes the NPA on the service line with a start date Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for behavioral

intervention supports Other assessments (private evaluations) Behavior plans (original and revised versions) Incident reports Discipline reports/log


An assessment is not required. Timeline for Services

Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to begin services. The ISA will be forwarded to the appropriate NPA for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to initiate services. The NPA will not begin services until the agency has a signed ISA for the student.



© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 17









Forward the following completed and signed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Cover letter requesting a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) (Note: the

director and the NPA determine the maximum number of hours needed to conduct assessment). Please indicate which NPA the LEA is selecting to complete the FBA.

D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for a behavioral

intervention assessment and behavioral intervention supports Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for a

behavioral intervention assessment and behavioral intervention supports Other assessments (private evaluations, Occupational Therapy (OT), Physical

Therapy (PT), etc.) Incident reports Discipline reports


Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for the NPA to conduct the assessment. The SELPA will forward the ISA to the





© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 18

appropriate NPA for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA to conduct the assessment. The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA.


Upon completion of the assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the NPA that conducted the assessment or the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to review the report findings and recommendations of the assessment and determine whether or not behavioral intervention supports services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the services should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the NPA, projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an ISA and forward it to the appropriate NPA for signature who will then determine initiation of services.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 19

Nonpublic schools (NPS) provide educational settings and services to students who meet the eligibility criteria for special education and are experiencing behavior difficulties that are too significant to be accommodated within a public school environment.


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a change of placement to a NPS setting.

2. Complete the Nonpublic School Placement Referral form (D/M 134) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education. Specify the team’s preference for a specific NPS, if applicable.

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. D/M 134 Nonpublic School Placement Referral form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for NPS placement

(Annual and Triennial IEP needs to be current) Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for NPS

placement If the last triennial was completed with a Triennial Assessment Determination form

(D/M 119), include the last full psycho-educational report Any additional information


Within ten (10) business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will review the packet for completion and forward it to the LEA’s NPS of choice. The NPS will contact the parent and placement will be made within 10 business days. The NPS will work directly with the LEA to schedule an IEP within 30 days of the student’s placement at the school. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop a Master Contract with the NPS if one does not currently exist and an Individual Service Agreement (ISA). The ISA will be




© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 20

forwarded to the appropriate NPS for signature. The SELPA will enter the NPS placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 21



2. Complete the Nonpublic School Placement Referral form (D/M 134) and obtain the signatures of the person making the referral and the director of special education. Specify the team’s preference for a specific Nonpublic School (NPS), if applicable.

3. Juvenile Hall/Nonpublic School Students - If the student’s last placement was a local NPS prior to being moved to a juvenile detention center, only complete form D/M 134 upon the student’s return to the LEA in lieu of preparing a new transfer packet.

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 134 Nonpublic School Placement Referral form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for NPS

placement that documents the previous NPS placement Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for

NPS placement If the last triennial was completed with a Triennial Assessment Determination form

(D/M 119), include the last full psycho-educational report Any additional information


Within 10 business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will review the packet for completion and forward it to the LEA’s NPS of choice. The NPS will contact the parent and placement will be made within 10 business days. The NPS will work directly with the LEA to schedule an IEP within 30 days of the student’s placement at the school. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop a Master Contract with the NPS if one does not currently exist and an Individual Service Agreement (ISA). The ISA will be forwarded to the appropriate NPS for signature. The SELPA will enter the NPS placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 22

School-based occupational therapy (OT) supports the student’s ability to gain access to and make progress in the school curriculum. OT supports a child’s engagement and participation in daily occupations, which includes activities in daily living, education, prevocational work, work, play, rest, leisure, and social participation. OT works on mediation (improving sensory and motor foundations of learning and behavior) to help the child succeed in school.


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for an OT assessment.



a. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested.

b. The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the Parental Authorization section of form D/M 66.

c. It is important that the parent/guardian return the form to the LEA on the date that it is signed or as soon as possible thereafter. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped.


Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 120A Occupational Therapy Referral form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for occupational

therapy Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for

occupational therapy Any additional supporting information


Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA, will forward it to a SELPA occupational therapist.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 23

The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA.


Upon completion of the OT assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by either the occupational therapist that conducted the assessment or the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to determine whether or not services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the services should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for signature and forward it to the occupational therapist or the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature who will then assign a therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the OT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 24





Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form D/M 120A Occupational Therapy Referral form Current occupational therapy report, if available, that specifies the occupational

therapy services the student was receiving and the occupational therapy goals IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for

occupational therapy that lists occupational therapy services and goals Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for

occupational therapy Timeline for Assessment

An assessment is not required for transfer referrals. Assessments are completed at three-year intervals (from the date that the services originally began) unless there are extenuating circumstances that dictate otherwise.


Within five business days of receipt of the transfer referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) for signature and forward it to the occupational therapist or the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature who will then assign a therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the OT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 25

School-based physical therapy (PT) supports the student’s ability to gain access to and make progress in the school curriculum. It corrects, facilitates, or adapts to the student’s functional performance in motor control and coordination, posture and balance, functional mobility, accessibility, and the use of assistive devices. PT works on compensation (i.e. modifying the environment, tools, or task) to help the child succeed in school.


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for a PT assessment.




a. The person making the referral should check the box that corresponds to the type of assessment(s) requested.

b. The parent/guardian should initial each applicable statement listed under the Parental Authorization section form D/M 66.

c. It is important that the parent/guardian return the form to the LEA on the date that it is signed or as soon as possible thereafter. When the signed Assessment Plan is received by the LEA, it should be date stamped.

Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 120B Physical Therapy Referral form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form D/M 66 Assessment Plan form Physician’s note with diagnosis IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for physical therapy Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for physical

therapy Timeline for Assessment

Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA, will review the packet for completion and forward it to the appropriate physical therapist.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 26

The assessment must occur within 60 calendar days from the date the Assessment Plan was received by the LEA.


Upon completion of the PT assessment, a report will be sent to the director of special education by the physical therapist or the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA with a request to schedule an IEP meeting. The director of special education will reconvene the IEP team to determine whether or not PT services are warranted. If the IEP team agrees that services are not needed, it will be documented in the IEP notes. If the IEP team agrees that services are appropriate, the service should be listed on an Addendum to the IEP including the projected start date, duration, and frequency. The Addendum should be forwarded to the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA.

Within five (5) business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will assign a physical therapist and determine initiation of services. The SELPA will enter the PT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 27





Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form D/M 120B Physical Therapy Referral form Current physical therapy report, if available, that specifies the physical therapy

services the student was receiving and the physical therapy goals IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the transfer referral for physical

therapy that lists physical therapy services and goals Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the transfer referral for

physical therapy


An assessment is not required for transfer referrals. Assessments are completed at three-year intervals (from the date that the services originally began) unless there are extenuating circumstances that dictate otherwise.


PT services for the student will begin immediately upon receipt of the physical therapy transfer referral packet by the SELPA physical therapist. The SELPA will enter the PT services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 28


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to confirm the student is eligible for special education services and determine a need for a referral for mental health evaluation.

2. Refer the student to the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC) for a mental health evaluation to determine eligibility for residential placement. IEP attendees must include the SELPA Nonpublic School Coordinator and a DMCC representative.

3. If the student does not meet the baseline criteria for residential placement, the referral process ends.

4. If the IEP team determines that the referral is appropriate, the referral process continues.

5. Complete the Residential Placement Assessment Referral form (D/M 151). 6. Complete the Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form (D/M 63) and

obtain the parent/guardian signature. Specify the receiving agency as the Desert/Mountain Children’s Center (DMCC).

Forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form D/M 151 Residential Placement Assessment Referral form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year referring the student for an

assessment for residential eligibility Most current complete annual or triennial IEP Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years from the time the student

was identified as eligible for special education and related services Any additional information in support of the referral


Upon receipt of the completed referral: • The Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will forward the referral to

the DMCC for processing. • The DMCC will send out an Assessment Plan (D/M 66) to the parent/guardian

for consent for assessment. • Upon receipt of the signed Assessment Plan (D/M 66), the 60 day assessment

timeline begins. • The DMCC will conduct the assessment. • The DMCC will contact the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 29

when the assessment is complete to schedule an IEP. Timeline for Services

Upon completion of the residential assessment, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will coordinate an IEP team meeting to determine eligibility for residential placement services. If the IEP team agrees that the student is eligible for and requires residential placement as the least restrictive environment, the DMCC will forward residential placement packets to potential residential treatment centers (RTCs). Upon receipt of responses from the residential facilities, the results will be shared with the student’s parent/guardian and a facility will be selected. The student will be enrolled at the selected RTC as soon as possible. Transportation of the student to the RTC is based on the LEA of residence’s reimbursement policy. After the student is placed at the RTC, the LEA of residence will schedule a transfer IEP meeting within 30 days to document the new placement. The placement should be listed on an IEP document, including the NPS, residential placement, start date, duration, and frequency of each service to be provided. Within five business days of receipt of the Addendum to the IEP, the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) with the NPS and RTC. If a Master Contract does not exist, one will be developed and an ISA. The SELPA will enter the NPS and RTC placement into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.

© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 30

The local education agency that placed the student at the beginning of the fiscal year is responsible for funding the residential placement for the remainder of the school year, including extended school year (ESY). EC 56325(c)



2. Confirm the student’s current residential placement and educational services through a review of current Individualized Education Program (IEP).


Upon confirmation of prior placement, forward the following completed documents to the attention of the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA. D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year that documents the previous

residential placement Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for residential

placement Any additional information in support of the referral


The new LEA of residence will schedule an IEP team meeting within 30 days of the transfer to document the new placement. The placement should be listed on an IEP or IEP Addendum including the NPS, residential placement, start date, duration, and frequency. The IEP or IEP Addendum should be forwarded to the Nonpublic School Coordinator at the SELPA.





© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 31

Special health care services are available for students who have special health care needs.


1. Convene an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting to document the team’s decision to refer the student for special health care services.



Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 148 Special Health Care Services Referral form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for special health care

services Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for special

health care services Current Summary of Treatment Plan

Must be signed by physician and parent/guardian Must include diagnosis Must specify special health care need required Must specify medication type and dosage Must specify administration instructions

Any additional supporting information Timeline for Services

Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) and forward it to the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the referral packet to the appropriate NPA. The agency will contact the person who signed the referral to coordinate and begin services. The SELPA will enter the services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.





© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 32





Forward the following documents to the attention of the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA. D/M 52 Transfer into LEA form D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information form D/M 148 Special Health Care Services Referral form Current Summary of Treatment Plan if available, that specifies the special health care

services the student was receiving IEP or IEP Addendum dated within one year of the referral for special health care

services that lists the special health care services the student was receiving Psycho-educational evaluation dated within three years of the referral for special

health care services Timeline for Services

Within five business days of receipt of the completed referral packet, the Program Manager, Due Process at the SELPA will develop an Individual Service Agreement (ISA) and forward it to the appropriate Nonpublic Agency (NPA) for signature. Upon receipt of the signed ISA, the SELPA will forward the transfer referral packet to the appropriate NPA. The agency will contact the person who signed the referral to coordinate and begin services. The SELPA will enter the services into the SELPA Management Information System (MIS) database.







© 2015 CAHELP rev. 08/15 | Page 33

Terms and Acronyms Used in this Handbook

Assistive Technology AT Behavioral Health Counseling BHC Desert/Mountain Children’s Center DMCC Individual Services Agreement ISA Local Education Agency LEA Low Incidence Equipment LIE Management Information System MIS Nonpublic Agency NPA Nonpublic School NPS Occupational Therapy OT Physical Therapy PT Residential Treatment Center RTC Student Assistance Program SAP School-Aged Treatment Services SATS Screening Assessment Referral and Treatment SART Special Education Local Plan Area SELPA

SELPA Forms D/M 52 Transfer Into District D/M 63 Authorization for Use and/or Disclosure of Information D/M 66 Assessment Plan D/M 86A Low Incidence Pre-Approval/Reimbursement D/M 108 Initial Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services D/M 108A Annual Request for Audiological Evaluations/Services D/M 119 Triennial Assessment Determination Form D/M 120A Occupational Therapy Referral D/M 120B Physical Therapy Referral D/M 127 Assistive Technology Assessment Referral D/M 134 Nonpublic School Placement Referral D/M 148 Special Health Care Services Referral D/M 151 Residential Placement Assessment Referral DMCC 100A Referral for Behavioral Health Services DMCC 100B SART Referral for Behavioral Health Services
















Mission Statement

IEP MANUAL CONTENTS

• IEP Notices • IEP Team Members • Demographics – D/M 68A • Demographics Sample – D/M 68A • Student Strengths – D/M 68B • Program Options & Rationale – D/M 68C • Supplementary Aides & Supports – D/M 68D • Transition Services & Goals – D/M 68E • PLOPS & Goals – D/M 68F • Progress Reports – D/M 68H • Signature Page – D/M 68G • Testing Accommodations – D/M 68L • IEP Notes – D/M 68N • Extended School Year (ESY) – D/M 68P • Chapter 5 – ESY Guidelines • Addendums – D/M 68M • Manifestation Determination – D/M 68J • Behavioral Emergency Report • Chapter 3 – Eligibility Criteria • WebIEP

PBIS Sites - Various Stages of Implementation2009-10 / Cohort I - Total 11 Sites

Hesperia USD

Snowline JUSD

Lime Street Elem

Baldy Mesa Elem

Chaparral HS

Heritage School

Phelan Elem

Piñon Hills Elem

Piñon Mesa MS

Quail Valley MS

Serrano HS

Vista Verde Elem

Wrightwood Elem

2014-15 / Cohort VI - Total 12 Sites

Baker USD

Victor ValleyUHSD

Hesperia USD

Baker Elem

Baker Jr. High

Baker HS

Silverado HS

Victor Valley HS

Goodwill Edu. Center

Adelanto HS

Maple Elem

Joshua Circle

Barstow HS

Barstow Jr. HS

Cameron Elem

Central HS

Crestline Elem

Henderson Elem

Lenwood Elem

Montara Elem

Skyline North Elem

Carmel Elem School

Mesa Grande Elem

Mission Crest Elem

Mesquite Trails Elem

Lucerne Valley Elem

Needles HS

Needles MS

Vista Colorado Elem

Oro Grande Elem

Riverside Prep Elem

Riverside Prep MS

Riverside Prep HS

Silver Valley HS

Snowline Virtual Acad

Hook Jr. High

Lakeview MS

2013-14 / Cohort V - Total 25 Sites

Barstow USD

Hesperia USD

Oro GrandeSD

Victor ValleyUHSD

Needles USD

Snowline JUSD

Snowline JUSD

Silver Valley USD

EC PBIS Sites

K-12 PBIS Sites 87

26

113Total

Lucerne Valley USD

2010-11 / Cohort II - Total 9 Sites

AdelantoElem SD

Bradach Elem

Columbia MS

Eagle Ranch Elem

George Magnet School

Victoria Magathan Elem

Mesa Linda MS

Morgan/Kincaid Prep

Theodore Vick Elem

West Creek Elem

2011-12 / Cohort III - Total 5 Sites

SilverValleyUSD

Ft. Irwin MS

Lewis Elem

Newberry Springs Elem

Tiefort View Inter.

Yermo School

Barstow STEM AcadBarstow USD

Ft. Irwin CYSSFt. Irwin

Village Elem

Phelan State Preschool

rev. August, 2015

Victor Elem SD

District School District School

District School

2015-16 / Cohort VII - Total 8 Sites

Victor Valley UHSD

Gus Franklin STEM Academy

Aveson Global Leadership Acad

Aveson School of Leaders

Phoenix Academy

Sandia Academy

Liberty Elem

Cobalt Institute Math & Science

University Prep

Victor Elem SD

2014-15 / Early Childhood Pilot - Total 1 Site

District School

District School

District School

Baldwin Lane Elem

Big Bear Elem

Big Bear MS

North Shore Elem

Ace HS

Riverview Middle

Helendale Elem

Brentwood Elem

Challenger

Del Rey Elem

Green Tree East Elem

Irwin & The Academy

Mojave Vista Elem

Park View Elem

Puesta Del Sol Elem

Adelanto Elem

Westside Park Elem

2012-13 / Cohort IV - Total 17 Sites

Bear ValleyUSD

Helendale SD

VictorElem SD

AdelantoElem SD

District School

Adelanto Elem SD

Aveson CharterSchools

Apple Valley USD

2015-16 / Early Childhood I - Total 25 SitesProgram SiteApple Valley USDState Preschools

Hesperia USDState Preschools

Early Education Center

Desert Knolls

Mariana Academy

Phoenix Academy

Rancho Verde

Sandia Academy

Sitting Bull Academy

Sycamore Rocks

Vanguard Preparatory

Yucca Loma

Cottonwood

Eucalyptus

Hollyvale

Joshua Circle

Juniper

Lime Street

Mesa Grande

Baldy Mesa

Heritage

Phelan

Pinon Hills

Vista Verde

Wrightwood

Snowline JUSDState Preschools

VVC Child Development Lab

Apple Valley Early Ed Ctr (AVEEC)



MEMORANDUM DATE: August 25, 2015 TO: Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Advisory Leadership Committee and District Leaders FROM: Kami Murphy, PBIS Coordinator SUBJECT: PBIS Advisory Leadership Committee Meeting This message is to announce the upcoming meeting for: PBIS advisory Leadership Committee on September 18, 2015 This meeting will be held at the Desert Mountain Educational Service Center at 17800 Highway 18, Apple Valley, 92307 from 1:00 – 3:00 p.m. Lunch will be served at approximately 12:00 p.m. following Steering Committee. The PBIS Advisory Leadership Committee is responsible for advisement towards region-wide collaborative efforts of PBIS implementation and sustainability. The D/M SELPA would like to extend an invitation for any of our district leaders to attend and learn more about PBIS implementation in the Desert/Mountain area. Please register online at http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-103599 to ensure enough lunches are ordered. KM: jh

California Association of Health & Education Linked Professions 17800 Highway 18 Apple Valley, CA 92307-1219

P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org


Desert/Mountain SELPA

AUDIOLOGICAL SERVICES CALENDAR 2015 - 2016 Round 1 (Page 1 of 2)

EVALUATION

DATE DISTRICT/PROGRAM REFERRAL DUE DATE

September 2, 2015 SBCSS D/M Operations – Morgan Kincaid Prep August 19, 2015

September 8, 2015 Oro Grande School District / Riverside Prep. Charter August 25, 2015

September 14, 2015 SBCSS D/M Operations – Hollyvale #1 August 31, 2015

September 15, 2015 Apple Valley USD #1 /Academy for Academic Excellence September 1, 2015

September 16, 2015 Bear Valley Unified School District September 2, 2015

September 17, 2015 Silver Valley Unified School District (Fort Irwin) September 3, 2015

September 22, 2015 Apple Valley USD #2 September 8, 2015

September 24, 2015 Adelanto School District #1 /Desert Trails Preparatory Charter September 10, 2015

September 28, 2015 SBCSS D/M Operations – Hollyvale #2 September 14, 2015

September 30, 2015 Snowline JUSD / Excelsior Charter (Phelan campus) September 16, 2015

October 1, 2015 Silver Valley Unified School District (Valley Schools) September 17, 2015

October 2, 2015 Adelanto School District #2 September 18, 2015

October 8, 2015 SBCSS D/M Operations – Sitting Bull Academy September 24, 2015

October 14, 2015 Helendale School District September 30, 2015

October 20, 2015 Lucerne Valley Unified School District October 6, 2015

October 22, 2015 Hesperia USD #1/ Laverne Elem. Prep. Charter/Encore Charter October 8, 2015

October 27, 2015 Trona Joint Unified School District October 13, 2015

October 29, 2015 Hesperia USD #2/ Laverne Elem. Prep. Charter/Encore Charter October 15, 2015

October 30, 2015 Barstow USD/ Excelsior Charter (Barstow Campus) October 16, 2015

November 5, 2015 Hesperia USD #3 October 22, 2015

November 10, 2015 Needles Unified School District October 27, 2015

November 19, 2015 High Tech High Schools/ Health Sciences HS and Middle College November 5, 2015

December 3, 2015 VVUHSD / Excelsior Charter (Victorville Campus) November 19, 2015

December 8, 2015 Victor Elementary School District #1 November 24, 2015

December 10, 2015 Victor Elementary School District #2 November 25, 2015

Desert/Mountain SELPA

AUDIOLOGICAL SERVICES CALENDAR 2015 - 2016 Round 1 (Page 2 of 2)

EVALUATION

DATE DISTRICT/PROGRAM REFERRAL DUE

DATE

January 13, 2016 SBCSS D/M Operations - Morgan Kincaid Prep December 30, 2015

January 19, 2016 Baker Valley Unified School District January 5, 2016

February 4, 2016 SBCSS D/M Operations – Hollyvale #1 January 21, 2016

February 10, 2016 Adelanto School District #1/ Desert Trails Preparatory Charter January 27, 2016

February 11, 2016 SBCSS D/M Operations – Hollyvale #2 January 28, 2016

February 16, 2016 Apple Valley USD #1 /Academy for Academic Excellence February 2, 2016

February 18, 2016 Apple Valley USD #2 February 4, 2016

February 25, 2016 Adelanto School District #2 February 11, 2016

March 3, 2016 Barstow USD/Excelsior Charter (Barstow Campus) February 18, 2016

March 9, 2016 Needles Unified School District February 24, 2016

March 15, 2016 Oro Grande School District / Riverside Preparatory Charter March 1, 2016

March 17, 2016 Silver Valley Unified School District (Fort Irwin) March 3, 2016

March 22, 2016 Trona Joint Unified School District March 8, 2016

March 23, 2016 Helendale School District March 9, 2016

April 6, 2016 Snowline JUSD / Excelsior Charter School (Phelan campus) March 23, 2016

April 7, 2016 Hesperia USD #1/ Laverne Elem. Prep. Charter/Encore Charter March 24, 2016

April 8, 2016 Hesperia USD #2 / Laverne Elem. Prep. Charter/Encore Charter March 25, 2016

April 13, 2016 Victor Elementary School District #1 March 30, 2016

April 14, 2016 Hesperia USD #3 March 31, 2016

April 19, 2016 Victor Elementary School District #2 April 5, 2016

April 21, 2016 Silver Valley Unified School District (Valley Schools) April 7, 2016

April 22, 2016 SBCSS D/M Operations – Sitting Bull Academy April 8, 2016

April 27, 2016 Bear Valley Unified School District April 13, 2016

May 3, 2016 Lucerne Valley Unified School District April 19, 2016

May 5, 2016 High Tech High Schools/ Health Sciences HS and Middle College April 21, 2016

May 6, 2016 VVUHSD / Excelsior Charter (Victorville Campus) April 22, 2016

DESERT/MOUNTAIN SELPA2015/2016 NPS Student Placement Report

DISTRICT JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

ADELANTO 8 2 10 9 2 11APPLE VALLEY 11 2 9 22 14 2 9 25BAKERBARSTOW 3 1 4 4 1 5BEAR VALLEY 2 2 2 2HELENDALEHESPERIA 14 2 16 12 2 14HIGH TECH HIGHLUCERNE VALLEY 1 1 2 2 1 3NEEDLES 2 2 2 2ORO GRANDE 1 1 1 1SILVER VALLEY 3 1 4 4 1 5SNOWLINE 7 6 13 8 5 13TRONAVICTOR ELEM. 10 1 11 8 1 9VVUHSD 36 3 4 43 37 3 4 44

TOTALS 93 21 16 130 98 20 16 134

2013/14 SELPA-WIDE TOTALS 101 20 19 140 103 19 20 143 105 18 20 142 101 19 20 140 98 18 17 133 105 18 18 141










DESERT/MOUNTAIN SELPA2014/2015 NPS Student Placement Report

DISTRICT JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

NPS

NPS

/272

6

LCI/N

PS

TOTA

L

ADELANTO 11 1 12 11 1 12 14 1 15 12 1 13 12 2 14 12 2 14APPLE VALLEY 15 2 10 27 14 2 11 27 15 3 12 30 15 3 10 28 13 3 10 26 12 3 10 25BAKERBARSTOW 4 1 5 5 1 6 4 1 5 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3BEAR VALLEY 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2HELENDALEHESPERIA 16 2 18 16 2 18 15 3 18 16 3 19 14 3 17 16 2 18HIGH TECH HIGH 1 1 1 1LUCERNE VALLEY 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 3 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4NEEDLES 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2ORO GRANDE 1 1SILVER VALLEY 4 1 5 4 1 5 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4 3 1 4SNOWLINE 8 2 10 8 4 12 8 5 13 7 5 12 8 6 14 7 6 13TRONA 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1VICTOR ELEM. 12 3 15 12 3 15 15 3 18 16 3 19 16 3 19 14 2 16VVUHSD 28 2 3 33 30 2 3 35 31 2 3 36 36 2 3 41 29 3 3 35 32 3 4 39

TOTALS 101 13 17 131 103 15 18 136 107 19 19 145 110 21 17 148 100 22 18 140 101 22 18 141











UPCOMINGTRAININGS@CAHELP

(760) 552-6700(760) 242-536317800 Highway 18Apple Valley, CA 92307

9/2/2015 Charter Informational Meeting

Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 11:00 AM

9/2/2015 The Basics of Accessing the Curriculum through Assistive TechnologyCost: $25.00

8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Sheila Parisian

9/3/2015 WebIEP Training AM Session

Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM

Presented by: Colette Garland; Cindy Quan

9/3/2015 WebIEP Training PM Session

Cost: No Fee

1:30 PM to 4:00 PM

Presented by: Colette Garland

9/8/2015 Veteran Special Education Teachers’ Series

Cost: $100.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Renee Garcia

9/8/2015 Introduction to Restorative Practices

Cost: $25.00

8:30 AM to 4:30 PM

Presented by: Kami Murphy



9/8/2015 Veteran Special Education Teachers’ Series

Cost: $100.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM



Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM



Cost: No Fee

1:30 PM to 4:00 PM


9/10/2015 Connecting the Dots in Math: Using Number Sense For Struggling LearnersCost: $20.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM


9/10/2015 Autism Series 1A: Autism Spectrum Disorders and Evidence-Based Practices - An OverviewCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Jennifer Rountree; Sheila Parisian

9/11/2015 Preschool Professionals Collaboration Group

Cost: No Fee

8:00 AM to 11:30 AM

Presented by: Diane Garcia



9/15/2015 SWIS User Training

Cost: No Fee

12:30 PM to 4:00 PM

Presented by: Jennifer Harms

9/15/2015 PBIS Overview K-12

Cost: No Fee

1:45 PM to 3:45 PM


9/15/2015 PBIS in the Home

Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 11:00 AM



Cost: No Fee

1:30 PM to 4:00 PM



Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM


9/17/2015 Autism Series 1B: Visual Supports in the Inclusive ClassroomCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM




9/17/2015 CICO SWIS Training

Cost: No Fee

2:30 PM to 4:30 PM


9/17/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Coaches’ ForumCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 2:30 PM

Presented by: Kami Murphy; Natalie Sedano; Kristee Laiva

9/18/2015 PBIS Advisory Leadership Committee

Cost: No Fee

1:00 PM to 3:00 PM


9/21/2015 How Do They Hear? Part 1: Introduction to Hearing Aids, Cochlear Implants, Bone Conduction Systems and FM Systems for School Personnel, and Part 2: Troubleshooting FM System EquipmentCost: No Fee

2:00 PM to 4:00 PM

Presented by: Rhonda Evans; Rebecca Coming

9/22/2015 Keeping Cool at School: Self-Regulation Strategies

Cost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 11:30 AM

Presented by:

9/22/2015 Classroom Structure and Management - ABA Level 1A

Cost: $20.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Danielle Cote; Renee Garcia



9/23/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports - Year One Team Training - Cohort 7Cost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Kami Murphy; Ntalie Sedano; Kristee Laiva

9/24/2015 Autism Series 1C: Prompting & Reinforcement in the Inclusive ClassroomCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM


9/24/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Coaches’ TrainingCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 2:30 PM

Presented by: Kami Murphy; Natalie Sedano; Kristee Laiva

9/29/2015 TPP Beginning-of-the-Year Meeting

Cost: No Fee

8:00 AM to 1:00 PM

Presented by: Adrienne Shepherd

9/30/2015 PBIS Bootcamp

Cost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Kami Murphy; Kristee Laiva; Natalie Sedano

9/30/2015 Woodcock Johnson IV Achievement Training- AM Session

Cost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 11:30 AM




9/30/2015 Woodcock Johnson IV Achievement Training- PM Session

Cost: No Fee

1:00 PM to 4:00 PM


9/30/2015 Co-Teaching: The Power of Two

Cost: No Fee

8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Corinne Foley

10/2/2015 Desired Results Developmental Profi le (DRDP) 2015

Cost: No Fee

8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Diane Garcia, Jackie Nason

10/6/2015 Case by Case : Mental Health Disorders in Schools

Cost: $10.00

8:30 AM to 12:45 PM

Presented by: Corinne Foley

10/6/2015 Non- Violent Crisis Intervention Training ( CPI )

Cost: $30.00

8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Danielle Cote; Michael Norton

10/6/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports - Year Two Team Training - Cohort 6ACost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM




10/8/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports - Year Two Team Training - Cohort 6BCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM


10/9/2015 Mastering the Art of Writing IEP Notes

Cost: No Fee

3:00 PM to 5:00 PM

Presented by: Denise Edge


Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM



Cost: No Fee

1:30 PM to 4:00 PM


10/14/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports - Year Three Team Training - Cohort 5BCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM


10/14/2015 Common Core and Technology in the 21st Century ClassroomCost: $10.00

8:00 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Sheila Parisian; Stephanie Hedberg



10/15/2015 Autism Series 1D: Self-Management in the Inclusive ClassroomCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM


10/15/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions And Supports - Year Three Team Training - Cohort 5CCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM


10/20/2015 Management Information System (MIS)/Bridge Transfer

Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM


10/20/2015 SWIS User Training

Cost: No Fee

8:30 PM to 12:00 PM


10/20/2015 CICO SWIS Training

Cost: No Fee

1:00 PM to 3:00 PM


10/20/2015 Competing Pathways Charting and Functional Behavioral Assessment - ABA Level 1BCost: $20.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by: Danielle Cote; Renee Garcia



10/21/2015 Reading Excellence: Word Attack & Rate Development Strategies (REWARDS)Cost: $145.00

8:30 AM to 3:00 PM

Presented by: Rhonda Evans

10/22/2015 Managing School Crises: From Theory to Application

Cost: $45.00

8:00 AM to 4:00 PM

Presented by: Belinda Jauregui; Teah Barrow

10/22/2015 Community Advisory Committee Meeting

Cost: No Fee

6:00 PM to 7:30 PM

Presented by: ; Denise Edge


Cost: No Fee

9:00 AM to 12:00 PM



Cost: No Fee

1:30 PM to 4:00 PM


10/22/2015 Psychologists Committee Meeting

Cost: No Fee

8:00 AM to 4:00 PM

Presented by: Glenn Low; Renee Garcia



10/22/2015 Autism Series 1E: Social Narratives in the Inclusive ClassroomCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM


10/23/2015 Special Education Directors’ Training

Cost: No Fee

12:00 PM to 3:00 PM

Presented by: Corinne Foley; Denise Edge

10/23/2015 Prior Written Notice

Cost: No Fee

3:00 PM to 5:00 PM

Presented by: Denise Edge

10/27/2015 Why Try Foundation Course

Cost: $25.00

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM


10/27/2015 Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) Team WorkgroupCost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 3:30 PM

Presented by:

10/30/2015 Woodcock Johnson IV Achievement Training- AM Session

Cost: No Fee

8:30 AM to 11:30 AM




10/30/2015 Woodcock Johnson IV Achievement Training- PM Session

Cost: No Fee

1:00 PM to 4:00 PM


10/30/2015 Autism Series 1F: Video Modeling in the Inclusive ClassroomCost: $20.00

12:30 PM to 3:30 PM


DESIRED RESULTS DEVELOPMENTAL PROFILE (DRDP) Description: The Desired Results Developmental Profile (DRDP) is an observation tool utilized by educators to record individual progress towards the achievement of specific outcomes across many domains of development. This instrument was developed by the California Department of Education for administration with young children. The new DRDP (2015) has two versions--one for use with infants and toddlers; the other for use with preschool age children. It replaces the previous DRDP-R and DRDP-Access, creating one common instrument for use with both general and special education populations. The final version of the new DRDP 2015 will be available in August, 2015. Special education teachers, early intervention service providers, and speech language pathologists who work with children ages birth to 5 years are encouraged to attend. Participants will learn appropriate methods for administering the new DRDP 2015, including observation and data collection strategies. Accommodations for children with special needs will be reviewed. Educators will be given opportunities to practice scoring measures using sample videos. Ideas for collaborating with other professionals to share data will be explored. In addition, the DRDP 2015 as an important tool in the development and monitoring of IFSPs and IEPs will be discussed.

Presented By: Diane Garcia & Jackie Nason, Program Specialists

Date: October 2, 2015

Registration Time: 8:00 – 8:30 a.m

Training Time: 8:30 a.m – 3:30 p.m

Cost: Complimentary ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

Intended Audience: Special Education preschool teachers, preschool speech-language pathologists, and para-professionals who work with preschool children in special education settings.

Location: Desert Mountain Educational Service Center

Registration: To ensure that we provide enough materials for everyone please register online at: http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-100560. The registration deadline is September 25, 2015. For additional registration information, please contact Jennifer Holbrook at (760) 955-3559. For additional information regarding training content, please contact Diane Garcia at (760) 955-3588. There are no refunds for no-shows or cancellations after the registration deadline.

Special Accommodations: Please submit any special accommodation requests at least fifteen working days prior to the training by notating your request when registering at: http://sbcss.k12oms.org/52-100560.


P F

W

760-552-6700 760-242-5363 www.dmselpa.org



A THREE-day trainingavailable for School Psychologists, Clinical Psychologists, Speech Language Pathologists and related professionals interested in learning the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2 (ADOS-2) and how to incorporate information gathered through ADOS-2 administration into a comprehensive Autism Spectrum Disorders assessment.

Presenters:

STEVE KANNE, Ph.D., ABPP and ANNA LAAKMAN, M.Ed., from The Thompson Center for Autism and Neurodevelopmental Disorders

The Chapman Ability Project in collaboration with The Center for Autism and Neurodevelopmental Disorders presents

THE ADOS-2 AS PART OF A COMPREHENSIVE AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER ASSESSMENT

November 4-6, 2015

FOR MORE INFORMATIONPlease visit chapman.edu/cap or contact

JEANNE ANNE CARRIERE, Director of The Chapman Ability Project I (714) 628-2842 I [email protected]

Objectives, Wednesday 11/4 and Thursday 11/5:• To learn the semi-standardized administration of the ADOS-2.

• To learn about the interpretation and reporting of ADOS-2 results.

• To practice scoring the ADOS-2 based on live demonstrations.

• To develop clinical reliability with the ADOS-2 as a diagnostic tool.

Objectives, Friday 11/6:• To develop familiarity with the ADOS-2 through hands-on practice.

• To refine administration and scoring skills though applied practice and constructive feedback.

• To learn the components of a comprehensive Autism Spectrum Disorder assessment.

• To integrate information gathered through ADOS-2 administration into a comprehensive assessment

Workshop Content:

During days one and two, participants will receive clinical training with the ADOS-2. There will be an overview of the five modules (Modules one through four and the Toddler Module), live demonstrations of two of the modules, and opportunities to practice and discuss the scoring criteria. Day three goes beyond the traditional ADOS-2 clinical level training by providing opportunities for hands-on practice and constructive feedback provided by two practitioners with ADOS-2 research-reliable level training. Participants will also learn how to incorporate information gathered through ADOS-2 administration into a comprehensive ASD assessment.

Register by 10/9/15 for a discounted rate of $525 for the three day training. After 10/9/15 the cost is

$600. Group rates for 10 or more, and student rates are

available.

8 AM – 4:30 PM Daily Chapman University Sandhu Conference Center, Room D, One University Dr. Orange, CA 92866

NOVEMBER 4-6, 2015

Registration includes parking, morning coffee, and lunch daily.

steering committee meeting - cahelp · 8/28/2015 · 5.3 woodcock-johnson iv training corinne...

Documents