Select a button to change the background color on this page.
APPENDIX A - Part V
30. Must related services personnel attend IEP meetings?
Although Part B does not expressly require that the IEP team
include related services personnel as part of the IEP team
(Sec. 300.344(a)), it is appropriate for those persons to be
included if a particular related service is to be discussed as part
of the IEP meeting. Section 300.344(a)(6) provides that the IEP team
also includes ``at the discretion of the parent or the agency, other
individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the
child, including related services personnel as appropriate. * * *''
(Italics added.)
Further, Sec. 300.344(a)(3) requires that the IEP team for each
child with a disability include ``at least one special education
teacher, or, if appropriate, at least one special education provider
of the child * * *'' This requirement can be met by the
participation of either (1) a special education teacher of the
child, or (2) another special education provider such as a speech-
language pathologist, physical or occupational therapist, etc., if
the related service consists of specially designed instruction and
is considered special education under the applicable State standard.
If a child with a disability has an identified need for related
services, it would be appropriate for the related services personnel
to attend the meeting or otherwise be involved in developing the
IEP. As explained in the Committee Reports on the IDEA Amendments of
1997, ``Related services personnel should be included on the team
when a particular related service will be discussed at the request
of the child's parents or the school.'' (H. Rep. No. 105-95, p. 103
(1997); S. Rep. No. 105-17, p. 23 (1997)). For example, if the
child's evaluation indicates the need for a specific related service
(e.g., physical therapy, occupational therapy, special
transportation services, school social work services, school health
services, or counseling), the agency should ensure that a qualified
provider of that service either (1) attends the IEP meeting, or (2)
provides a written recommendation concerning the nature, frequency,
and amount of service to be provided to the child. This written
recommendation could be a part of the evaluation report.
A public agency must ensure that all individuals who are
necessary to develop an IEP that will meet the child's unique needs,
and ensure the provision of FAPE to the child, participate in the
child's IEP meeting.
31. Must the public agency ensure that all services specified in
a child's IEP are provided?
Yes. The public agency must ensure that all services set forth
in the child's IEP are provided, consistent with the child's needs
as identified in the IEP. The agency may provide each of those
services directly, through its own staff resources; indirectly, by
contracting with another public or private agency; or through other
arrangements. In providing the services, the agency may use whatever
State, local, Federal, and private sources of support are available
for those purposes (see Sec. 300.301(a)); but the services must be
at no cost to the parents, and the public agency remains responsible
for ensuring that the IEP services are provided in a manner that
appropriately meets the student's needs as specified in the IEP. The
SEA and responsible public agency may not allow the failure of
another agency to provide service(s) described in the child's IEP to
deny or delay the provision of FAPE to the child. (See Sec. 300.142,
Methods of ensuring services.)
32. Is it permissible for an agency to have the IEP completed
before the IEP meeting begins?
No. Agency staff may come to an IEP meeting prepared with
evaluation findings and proposed recommendations regarding IEP
content, but the agency must make it clear to the parents at the
outset of the meeting that the services proposed by the agency are
only recommendations for review and discussion with the parents.
Parents have the right to bring questions, concerns, and
recommendations to an IEP meeting as part of a full discussion, of
the child's needs and the services to be provided to meet those
needs before the IEP is finalized.
Public agencies must ensure that, if agency personnel bring
drafts of some or all of the IEP content to the IEP meeting, there
is a full discussion with the child's parents, before
the child's IEP is finalized, regarding drafted content and the
child's needs and the services to be provided to meet those needs.
33. Must a public agency include transportation in a child's IEP
as a related service?
As with other related services, a public agency must provide
transportation as a related service if it is required to assist the
disabled child to benefit from special education. (This includes
transporting a preschool-aged child to the site at which the public
agency provides special education and related services to the child,
if that site is different from the site at which the child receives
other preschool or day care services.)
In determining whether to include transportation in a child's
IEP, and whether the child needs to receive transportation as a
related service, it would be appropriate to have at the IEP meeting
a person with expertise in that area. In making this determination,
the IEP team must consider how the child's disability affects the
child's need for transportation, including determining whether the
child's disability prevents the child from using the same
transportation provided to nondisabled children, or from getting to
school in the same manner as nondisabled children.
The public agency must ensure that any transportation service
included in a child's IEP as a related service is provided at public
expense and at no cost to the parents, and that the child's IEP
describes the transportation arrangement.
Even if a child's IEP team determines that the child does not
require transportation as a related service, Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires that the child
receive the same transportation provided to nondisabled children. If
a public agency transports nondisabled children, it must transport
disabled children under the same terms and conditions. However, if a
child's IEP team determines that the child does not need
transportation as a related service, and the public agency
transports only those children whose IEPs specify transportation as
a related service, and does not transport nondisabled children, the
public agency would not be required to provide transportation to a
disabled child.
It should be assumed that most children with disabilities
receive the same transportation services as nondisabled children.
For some children with disabilities, integrated transportation may
be achieved by providing needed accommodations such as lifts and
other equipment adaptations on regular school transportation
vehicles.
34. Must a public agency provide related services that are
required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special
education, whether or not those services are included in the list of
related services in Sec. 300.24?
The list of related services is not exhaustive and may include
other developmental, corrective, or supportive services if they are
required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special
education. This could, depending upon the unique needs of a child,
include such services as nutritional services or service
coordination.
These determinations must be made on an individual basis by each
child's IEP team.
35. Must the IEP specify the amount of services or may it simply
list the services to be provided?
The amount of services to be provided must be stated in the IEP,
so that the level of the agency's commitment of resources will be
clear to parents and other IEP team members (Sec. 300.347(a)(6)).
The amount of time to be committed to each of the various services
to be provided must be (1) appropriate to the specific service, and
(2) stated in the IEP in a manner that is clear to all who are
involved in both the development and implementation of the IEP.
The amount of a special education or related service to be
provided to a child may be stated in the IEP as a range (e.g.,
speech therapy to be provided three times per week for 30-45 minutes
per session) only if the IEP team determines that stating the amount
of services as a range is necessary to meet the unique needs of the
child. For example, it would be appropriate for the IEP to specify,
based upon the IEP team's determination of the student's unique
needs, that particular services are needed only under specific
circumstances, such as the occurrence of a seizure or of a
particular behavior. A range may not be used because of personnel
shortages or uncertainty regarding the availability of staff.
36. Under what circumstances is a public agency required to
permit a child with a disability to use a school-purchased assistive
technology device in the child's home or in another setting?
Each child's IEP team must consider the child's need for
assistive technology (AT) in the development of the child's IEP
(Sec. 300.346(a)(2)(v)); and the nature and extent of the AT devices
and services to be provided to the child must be reflected in the
child's IEP (Sec. 300.346(c)).
A public agency must permit a child to use school-purchased
assistive technology devices at home or in other settings, if the
IEP team determines that the child needs access to those devices in
nonschool settings in order to receive FAPE (to complete homework,
for example).
Any assistive technology devices that are necessary to ensure
FAPE must be provided at no cost to the parents, and the parents
cannot be charged for normal use, wear and tear. However, while
ownership of the devices in these circumstances would remain with
the public agency, State law, rather than Part B, generally would
govern whether parents are liable for loss, theft, or damage due to
negligence or misuse of publicly owned equipment used at home or in
other settings in accordance with a child's IEP.
37. Can the IEP team also function as the group making the
placement decision for a child with a disability?
Yes, a public agency may use the IEP team to make the placement
decision for a child, so long as the group making the placement
decision meets the requirements of Secs. 300.552 and 300.501(c),
which requires that the placement decision be made by a group of
persons, including the parents, and other persons knowledgeable
about the child, the meaning of the evaluation data, and the
placement options.
38. If a child's IEP includes behavioral strategies to address a
particular behavior, can a child ever be suspended for engaging in
that behavior?
If a child's behavior impedes his or her learning or that of
others, the IEP team, in developing the child's IEP, must consider,
if appropriate, development of strategies, including positive
behavioral interventions, strategies and supports to address that
behavior, consistent with Sec. 300.346(a)(2)(i). This means that in
most cases in which a child's behavior that impedes his or her
learning or that of others is, or can be readily anticipated to be,
repetitive, proper development of the child's IEP will include the
development of strategies, including positive behavioral
interventions, strategies and supports to address that behavior. See
Sec. 300.346(c). This includes behavior that could violate a school
code of conduct. A failure to, if appropriate, consider and address
these behaviors in developing and implementing the child's IEP would
constitute a denial of FAPE to the child. Of course, in appropriate
circumstances, the IEP team, which includes the child's parents,
might determine that the child's behavioral intervention plan
includes specific regular or alternative disciplinary measures, such
as denial of certain privileges or short suspensions, that would
result from particular infractions of school rules, along with
positive behavior intervention strategies and supports, as a part of
a comprehensive plan to address the child's behavior. Of course, if
short suspensions that are included in a child's IEP are being
implemented in a manner that denies the child access to the ability
to progress in the educational program, the child would be denied
FAPE.
Whether other disciplinary measures, including suspension, are
ever appropriate for behavior that is addressed in a child's IEP
will have to be determined on a case by case basis in light of the
particular circumstances of that incident. However, school personnel
may not use their ability to suspend a child for 10 days or less at
a time on multiple occasions in a school year as a means of avoiding
appropriately considering and addressing the child's behavior as a
part of providing FAPE to the child.
39. If a child's behavior in the regular classroom, even with
appropriate interventions, would significantly impair the learning
of others, can the group that makes the placement decision determine
that placement in the regular classroom is inappropriate for that
child?
The IEP team, in developing the IEP, is required to consider,
when appropriate, strategies, including positive behavioral
interventions, strategies and supports to address the behavior of a
child with a disability whose behavior impedes his or her learning
or that of others. If the IEP team determines that such supports,
strategies or interventions are necessary to address the behavior of
the child, those services must be included in the child's IEP. These
provisions are designed to foster increased participation of
children with disabilities in regular
education environments or other less restrictive environments, not
to serve as a basis for placing children with disabilities in more
restrictive settings.
The determination of appropriate placement for a child whose
behavior is interfering with the education of others requires
careful consideration of whether the child can appropriately
function in the regular classroom if provided appropriate behavioral
supports, strategies and interventions. If the child can
appropriately function in the regular classroom with appropriate
behavioral supports, strategies or interventions, placement in a
more restrictive environment would be inconsistent with the least
restrictive environment provisions of the IDEA. If the child's
behavior in the regular classroom, even with the provision of
appropriate behavioral supports, strategies or interventions, would
significantly impair the learning of others, that placement would
not meet his or her needs and would not be appropriate for that
child.
40. May school personnel during a school year implement more
than one short-term removal of a child with disabilities from his or
her classroom or school for misconduct?
Yes. Under Sec. 300.520(a)(1), school personnel may order
removal of a child with a disability from the child's current
placement for not more than 10 consecutive school days for any
violation of school rules, and additional removals of not more than
10 consecutive school days in that same school year for separate
incidents of misconduct, as long as these removals do not constitute
a change of placement under Sec. 300.519(b). However, these removals
are permitted only to the extent they are consistent with discipline
that is applied to children without disabilities. Also, school
personnel should be aware of constitutional due process protections
that apply to suspensions of all children. Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S.
565 (1975). Section 300.121(d) addresses the extent of the
obligation to provide services after a child with a disability has
been removed from his or her current placement for more than 10
school days in the same school year.