23
Legal Aspects of Special Education and Social Foundations Free and Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment Chapters 9 & 12
Legal Aspects of Special Education and Social Foundations
Free and Appropriate Public Education and Least Restrictive Environment
Chapters 9 & 12
FAPE
“Free” and “public” not disputed “Appropriate” education is often
disputed Definition
– Provided at public expense– Meet State standards– Include appropriate education– Conforms with the IEP
Procedural Safeguards
Provide notice to parents Invite parents to participate Secure parental consent Make records available Allow independent educational
evaluation if in disagreement
Free Education
Special education and related services provided at no charge
Refusal due to cost is not allowed IDEA prohibits excuse of limited federal
funding Cost relevant only when options
available are “appropriate”
Free Education
Title XIX of the Social Security Act was amended in 1988 to assist in funding of needed services
Private insurance can also be funding source
Can allow fees that other students without disabilities are charged
State Standards
Meet requirements of State Standards which may be higher
Includes requirements of licensure and certification for educators
Appropriate Education
IEP for all students in special education Responsibility of school district Collaboration between parents and school
personnel Components of IEP must be complete No guarantee of achievement No liability of educators
Related Services
Supportive services Required to benefit from special education
program Reimbursement of services may be
requested Exclude medical services and devices Must accompany special education
School Health Services
Necessary to assist child to benefit from special education
Must be performed during school hours Can be provided by a person other than
a licensed physician
Litigation
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro - “Bright-Line” test
Cedar Rapids Community School District v. Garret F. - medical v. school health services
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson School District v. Rowley - appropriate education
The Rowley Standard
Is the school complying with IDEA procedures?
Is the IEP designed reasonable to enable child to benefit from educational opportunities?
Courts Role
Are procedural requirements being met?
Are the requirements of FAPE being followed?
Is special education providing educational benefit?
1993 Metaphor
Doe v. Board of Education of Tullahoma Schools
Cadillac v. Chevrolet
Post-Rowley Litigation
Procedural aspects– Follow procedural safeguards of FAPE– FAPE is denied if safeguards are not
followed Substantive aspects
– IEP is appropriate– Designed to achieve educational benefits
Procedural Violations
W.G v. Board of Trustees - failed to include classroom teacher of private school in IEP process
Tice v. Botetourt County School Board - 6 month delay in evaluation and IEP
Spielberg v. Henrico County Public Schools and Hall v. Vance County Board of Education - violated parent participation and notification, resp.
Substantive Violations
“Meaningful benefit” v. “some benefit” - Hall v. Vance County Board of Education
“Meaningful growth” - Carter v. Florence County School District Four
Polk v. Central Susquehanna Intermediate Unit 16 - any degree of progress
Substantive Violations
Cypress-Fairbanks ISD v. Michael F. - four-part test– Individualized program based on
assessment and performance– LRE– Coordinated and collaborative services– Academic and nonacademic benefits
Methodology and FAPE
Disagreement with particular methodologies– Curriculum– Interventions– Extended school year
Placement Settings
– Facilities– Equipment– Location– Personnel required
Determining placement– Tests– Recommendations– Conditions– Background– Adaptive behavior
Placement Factors
Based on IEP Annually reviewed Least restrictive environment
– As close to general education as possible– As close to home as possible
Graduation
No longer eligible for FAPE under IDEA– Maximum age to receive services– Graduates from high school with regular
diploma Can receive FAPE until “age-out” of
IDEA
Standards
Achieved IEP goals Written notice Summary of academic achievement and
functional performance
IDEA ‘97 and ‘04
Based on student needs Measurable and meaningful progress Scientific research-based programs Ongoing evaluation
