1. If the disability suspected is in the area of communication only, and the Full and Individual Evaluation consent is signed for communication only, does the EER reflect only the area of communication or should all areas be summarized on the EER to demonstrate that Full and Individual Eval was conducted?
If communication was the only area where disability was suspected and the only area indicated on the consent, the EER will only summarize communication. All three questions must be addressed.
2. Is it your understanding that all seven domains do NOT need to be addressed at the DSF meeting? If so, this is not very clear on the example document. Not all service providers are aware that you don't need to go to so much work at this stage in the process but you will gather this data for the FIE. So can we edit the example documents or share this information with service providers? The disability suspect meeting/process focuses only on the areas of concern. The DS form is not required to address all domains. The consent form does address all seven domains. We will review the examples and provide additional ones if they are needed.
3. What if parents report no concerns with hearing or vision but cannot produce test results/documentation/evidence indicating that the student passed?
If you suspect a disability (in any area) but don’t have current hearing or vision screening data, you need to indicate on the consent form that additional data is needed in the area of hearing or vision.
4. Disability Suspected Hearing Scenario 4
Would the left column be checked for hearing in addition to the right column on the consent form? Scenario 4 was: If there is not current hearing information (older than a year) but the student did not pass previous screenings and/or parent & teacher report current concerns with hearing, summarize this on the DSF, check hearing in the right-hand column on the Consent for Evaluation, and contact your audiologist.
If the data indicates sufficient enough concern that a disability is suspected, both the left and right column are checked. If disability is not suspected, you would check the right-hand column only, indicating a need for more hearing data.
5. If we have an initial evaluation, why does hearing/vision get checked on the RIGHT-hand column on consent?
It would be checked on the right-hand column if you don’t have current hearing information (within one year). You would check the left-hand column if disability is suspected in that domain.
6. Disability Suspected Form. Does this go in the cumulative folder or Special Education file?
If the student is entitled, it becomes part of the Special Education record. If not, it is part of the cumulative record.
7. Hearing: Past procedure was to accept a positive history of a past negative exam. Example: Student is an 8th grader and had a negative (no concerns or normal) screen in 6th grade. We would then only get an audiologist to screen if the school nurse has reason to suspect any change in history or new reason for concern. Has this policy we (audiologists and nurses) developed changed?
We are now required to have current information within one year.
8. Is a general education teacher no longer required at a DS meeting?
No, they are not required to attend, but there is one LEA representative required to be involved in the disability suspect process. Most likely that will be the general education teacher because they typically have the most information about the student.
9. In the information given earlier this year, I thought that parents were a required participant in a DSF meeting. Did this change?
Yes. We received the information from the state directors that they are not required to participate. It is still highly recommended and a good practice to include them.
10. The EER form "sample" that was given out at the last regional meeting had areas that were "assessed" but not found to be discrepant just under question B. Is this no longer adequate?
It is only adequate in certain situations. It is only adequate if those areas were not originally areas of suspected disability and the initial assessments indicated that a disability was not suspected. That said, for every Full and Individual Evaluation there must be at least one area where all three questions are addressed and the report is complete. This is not a change from what we intended to tell people in earlier meetings, but it wasn't explained well.
11. What if the design of the intervention takes longer than time limit will allow for entitlement decision? Then the decision cannot be made due to lack of data?
No, a decision must be made at the end of 60 days. If there is not evidence that the student is entitled, the decision must be that the student is not entitled. If the student is not entitled, you will still want to make recommendations as to the student's needs. If you have significant concerns about a student, contact your partnership director.
12. Do interventions need to be uploaded to associated files? Also, when kids aren't eligible, are the files that were uploaded archived or do they disappear?
We are currently working with secretaries on this.
13. Can we use building intervention plans like their IDM plans or do we need to use the AEA intervention form?
Yes, you can use the building form if the intervention was conducted by the school. If you become involved and this intervention is missing some components, you do not need to start a new form, you may "tweak" or adjust it. If an AEA staff member is conducting or directing an intervention, one of the standard Heartland Intervention Plan forms should be used.
14. How do parents know to ask for a copy of the Suspected Disability form if they don't know it exists?
Although we are not required to provide the parent a copy of the Disability Suspect form, giving it to them is an allowable practice. You don't have to wait for the parent to ask.
15. A principal in one of my buildings told a counselor in another district building that "there is a new process this year, we don't do problem solving anymore." Where in the disability process discussions are you including the problem solving process?
The cycle of assessing needs, planning, implementing and evaluating is used continuously throughout the process. The new version of the "Working Together for Children" booklet would be a great resource to provide to this counselor. The problem solving process is explained, and it is clear how it is used within the process.
16. Is there an electronic graph that we could use with intervention plans that once completed could be uploaded to the Web IEP? Similar to the graphing tool you have access to when you have an IEP goal on the Web IEP.
Yes there is. (They are Excel templates so will not function exactly like the graph in the Web IEP.) Please contact your discipline Program Assistant.
17. Is there a way to "bank" information on the EER, especially in the "expected performance" area?
No. You will have to cut and paste from other documents.
18. For the group intervention plan--which form are you referencing? The DDL plan or the Group Intervention plan?
Either may be used. Some versions out there are missing a few components that you will need to add for now. There is a group working on making sure that all versions have all required components. Please stay tuned.
19. If we sign consent for evaluation, begin to gather assessment data and find no discrepancy and the student is making progress in general education (no intervention in place prior to signing for evaluation), what do we do about the intervention?
There still must be an intervention. Focus on the area of concern that the parent or teacher originally brought to the table. An intervention needs to be conducted, but it only needs to involve the resources needed to address student needs. So, your intervention might be documenting the instruction that is being provided and collecting progress monitoring data to indicate that sufficient progress is being made. Remember to match the rigor of the intervention to the problem, but bottom line is that there must be an intervention if consent is signed.
20. What is valid and reliable data? Please quantify. 7-12 data points are used to make a statistically valid instructional change? 3 data points for baseline?
Three data points for baseline is documented in the research and is consistently recommended by experts in the field. Reliability and validity depend upon the measurement tool you are using. The rigor again should be matched to the severity of your problem. Refer back to the slides from last year's Polishing Practice for more specific information about the data required to make an instructional change.
21. The PowerPoint noted that you may have an intervention in one area and not in another. How would you determine eligibility in additional areas without an intervention?
First remember that a student is eligible for special education services, not a particular content area. The data that you gathered in the primary area of concern is used to establish eligibility. The data you need in each of the other areas is needed to determine goals and instructional needs. You still need to address rate of progress, discrepancy and instructional needs. You will need to get your progress data from what is available from the general education classroom in areas where there was no intervention.
22. Is an intervention required in at least one area to determine eligibility?
Yes
23. What happens when the implementation data suggests that the intervention was not implemented with integrity? Do we still entitle the student? What if we have the eligibility meeting within 60 days, but the parent takes a week to decide if they want services?
In order to make an eligibility decision, progress data are needed with instruction matched to student need. If you know that instruction matched to student need was not implemented, you would have to determine that a student does not have a disability. However, it will be more important than ever to work with your partnership director, the teacher and other team members early in the evaluation process to ensure that you have the data necessary to determine entitlement. The 60-day timeline applies to an eligibility determination meeting. It does not apply to when the parent will sign consent for services.
24. If you decide not to entitle but ask for another 60 days to continue to collect data, do you have to do two EERs? How does that work? Why can't it be 60 school days? With weekends, holidays, school breaks. . . sometimes we only end up with only 20 days to assess/provide intervention!
Evaluations cannot be extended past 60 calendar days because IDEA '04 requires evaluations be completed within 60 CALENDAR days. We realize that 60 school days would provide a lot more time, but timely evaluations are a requirement of special education legislation. A decision is required to be made within 60 days. You cannot extend the evaluation for another 60 days.
25. When we are pressed for time, how do we choose between meeting IEP minutes and collecting progress data for eligibility decisions?
Hopefully your conversations regarding teaming and collaboration are helpful with this situation. Both of these activities are legally required activities. We are required to meet IEP minutes. Additionally, we are required to make eligibility decisions using (along with discrepancy and need) progress data. Therefore, both of those activities are required.
26. If I have a student that there wasn't any data to rule out motor functioning, but the OT/PT are able to determine that the concern is not validated, do I write this in the summary section or answer the three questions?
I assume the motor concerns were brought up at the time consent was signed, not when a disability was suspected. If motor was added at time of consent, then the team member who did that evaluation may write a short summary of the data on the EER. If motor concerns were brought up during the disability suspect process, then progress, discrepancy and need to be documented throughout the EER.
27. Terra had planned to include the audiologist on new 3-5 referrals when she sends them out. Is it acceptable for the audiologist to go out and screen hearing prior to the DS meeting?
Yes.
28. Most of the early childhood questions were related to assessing vision and health.
We recognize that we need to work with our LEA partners to develop a consistent procedure for ensuring that health and vision assessments can be completed for children in preschools. This will entail a process that begins with screening and included provisions for a thorough health assessment when needed. We anticipate that procedures will involve shared responsibility between LEAs and Heartland for completing this work.
In the meantime, we ask that you explore possibilities with your schools. We hope that in many cases, school nurses can assist with the vision and health assessment, especially for children who attend a district preschool program. Staff feedback has indicated that in some districts this is already happening. In addition, we believe that, in some cases, school nurses have been assisting with vision and health assessment for children in community-based programs within a district’s boundaries.
We realize that in some cases it will not be possible for the school nurse to assist with these assessment needs, and Heartland will have to make arrangements to have them completed by a qualified professional.
