National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems

Recent Alerts

There are 3 documents which have been provided by NAPAS.

  1. A Senate IDEA Alert tartgeted to Republican Senators on the HELP Committee
  2. A list of Republican Senators on the HELP Committee with contact information of their offices in DC and in their state.
  3. A document "debunking" statements by the House Bill (HR 1350) proponents that their bill helps children with disabilities and families.

The Senate is due to introduce its IDEA Reauthorization bill by the end of the first week of June. It is imperative that constituents in states with Republican Senators on the HELP Committee contact them immediately!

These states are:

 

  1. SENATE IDEA ALERT

NAPAS National Association of Protection & Advocacy Systems

ACTION NEEDED NOW
May 23. 2003

Senate Will Introduce IDEA Reauthorization Bill First Week of June

Let Senators Know – Right Now!!!! -- What Should Be in a Good IDEA Bill

&

Tell Them the House Bill, H.R. 1350, is a Bad IDEA!!!

BACKGROUND

Senate leaders of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee are still working to try and introduce a bipartisan bill to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The target date for a Senate bill is the first week in June – right after Congress returns from its Memorial Day recess. This is the perfect time to share your recommendations with key HELP Committee Members, tell them what should and should not be in the Senate bill – if it is to truly address the needs of children with disabilities and their families.

The Senate has been working in a bipartisan manner to come up with an IDEA bill for two years. In the beginning, when the Senate was Democratic, Senator Kennedy (D-MA) was the Chairman of the Committee and Senator Gregg (R-NH) was the Ranking Member. Since the Senate went Republican their two roles have been reversed but they and their staff still have tried to work together on a bill.

Parents and other advocates hope this long-term bipartisan Senate effort works and that the end product is a Senate bill that protects and strengthens the educational services, supports, and procedural safeguards available to children with all kinds of disabilities and their families. It is critical that the Senate bill help – not harm children and families. It is critical that the Senate bill not look like the House bill, H.R. 1350. This would be a disaster because enactment of anything like H.R. 1350 would significantly limit parent and student rights under IDEA. The House passed bill would limit the number of children with disabilities who have real access to a free, appropriate, public education; increase burdens on parents while decreasing school district responsibilities and obligations; and ultimately result in harm to students with disabilities.

ACTION NEEDED: It would be best to work in coalition with parents, parent organizations, and disability organizations to get these important messages across.

  1. Contact the Republican Members of the Senate HELP Committee and strongly urge them continue to work together in a bipartisan manner on an IDEA reauthorization bill. Urge them not to accept H.R. 1350 as a substitute for their own bill. Doing so would undo a two-year bipartisan effort, as well as harm children with disabilities across the nation. (Contact information for Washington DC office and all state offices is attached in a Word file.)
  1. Please let Kathy McGinley at NAPAS know what your Members say – Kathy@napas.org or 202-408-9514.

Model Message Talking Points

Any IDEA reauthorization proposal should do the following:

A few of the most critical problems with H.R. 1350 are listed below.

  1. Ten State Paperwork Waiver
    1. It authorizes the Secretary of Education to grant waivers of paperwork requirements for up-to-ten states (for up-to-four years each) in the name of paperwork reduction.
  1. Discipline-
  1. Students to be punished for actions caused by their disabilities and allow the school district to make decisions about discipline without the input of the IEP team and others who know the student.
  2. Students could be placed in an alternative program for everyday violations of the school code -- such as smoking, cursing or being "disruptive" -- for up to 45 days or longer if the state law permits. These alternative programs do not allow the same access to the IEP and general curriculum as is allowed under current law, so students could receive a lesser quality education.
  3. There is no analysis required to determine whether or not the student’s IEP or program was appropriate or implemented as written. This means a child could be punished even if the district failed to provide behavior related services and did not do so.
  1. Funding Issues
  1. IEP provisions
  1. Procedural Safeguards/Due Process Provisions
      1. Delay parent’s access to due process hearings by requiring parents to wait one month and meet with the school district and before any complaint they raise could go to due process, regardless of the problem or issue.
      2. Limit fees to parents attorneys by giving governors the authority to set the rates for attorney fees – at any level, e.g. $1.00 per hour. This would make fewer lawyers available. (This provision was added by a Democrat, Rep. Case (HI).)
      3. Limit to one-year the parent’s right to request a due process hearing.

The same restrictions are not placed on school districts.

 

2. HELP COMMITTEE LIST

Judd Gregg, Chairman (R-NH)

393 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

T 202-224-3324

F 202-224-4952

E-mail: mailbox@gregg.senate.gov

Concord office

125 North Main Street

Concord, NH 03301

(603) 225-7115

Portsmouth Office

16 Pease Boulevard

Portsmouth, NH 03801

(603) 431-2171

Manchester office

41 Hooksett Road

Manchester, NH 03104

(603) 622-7979

Berlin Office

60 Pleasant Street

Berlin, NH 03570

(603) 752-2604

Bill Frist (R-TN)

416 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

T 202-224-3344

F 202-228-1264

E-mail: Web Form: frist.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Nashville

Office of Senator Bill Frist

28 White Bridge Road, Suite 211

Nashville, TN 37205

615-352-9411

615-352-9985 (fax)

Memphis

Office of Senator Bill Frist

5100 Poplar Avenue, Suite 514

Memphis, TN 38137

901-683-1910

901-683-3610 (fax)

Chattanooga

Office of Senator Bill Frist

James Building

735 Broad Street, Suite 701

Chattanooga, TN 37402

423-756-2757

423-756-5313 (fax)

Jackson

Office of Senator Bill Frist

200 East Main Street, Suite 111

Jackson, TN 38301

731-424-9655

731-424-8322 (fax)

Knoxville

Office of Senator Bill Frist

Twelve Oaks Executive Park

Building One, Suite 170

5401 Kingston Pike

Knoxville, TN 37919

865-602-7977

865-602-7979 (fax)

Kingsport/Tri-Cities

Office of Senator Bill Frist

10368 Wallace Alley Street, Suite 7

Kingsport, TN 37663

423-323-1252

423-323-0358 (fax)

Mike Enzi (R-WY)

290 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

T (202) 224-3424

F (202) 228-0359

E-mail: senator@enzi.senate.gov

CASPER

Federal Center

Suite 3201

100 East B Street

Casper, Wyoming 82601

Phone (307) 261-6572

CHEYENNE

Federal Center

Suite 2007

2120 Capitol Avenue

Cheyenne, Wyoming 82001

Phone (307) 772-2477

CODY

1285 Sheridan Avenue

Suite 210

Cody, Wyoming 82414

Phone (307) 527-9444

GILLETTE

400 S. Kendrick Avenue, Suite 303

Gillette, Wyoming 82716

Phone (307) 682-6268

JACKSON

Post Office Box 12470

Jackson, Wyoming 83002

Phone (307) 739-9507

Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

Dirkson Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-4944

F (202) 228-3398

E Web Form: alexander.senate.gov/contact.cfm

Chattanooga, TN

Joel E. Soloman Federal Building

900 Georgia Avenue, #260

Chattanooga, TN 37402

Phone: (423) 752-5337

Fax: (423) 752-5342

Jackson, TN

Federal Building

109 South Highland Street, #B-9

Jackson, TN 38301

Phone: (731) 423-9344

Fax: (731) 423-8918

Knoxville, TN

Howard H. Baker, Jr., U.S. Courthouse

800 Market Street, #112

Knoxville, TN 37902

Phone: (865) 545-4253

Fax: (865) 545-4252

Memphis, TN

Federal Building

167 North Main Street, #1068

Memphis, TN 38103

Phone: (901) 544-4224

Fax: (901) 544-4227

Nashville, TN

3322 West End Avenue, #120

Nashville, TN 37203

Phone: (615) 736-5129

Fax: (615) 269-4803

Tri-Cities, TN

Terminal Building, #101

Tri-Cities Regional Airport

2525 Highway 75

Blountville, TN 37617

Phone: (423) 325-6240

Fax: (423) 325-6236

Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

493 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510-0104

T (202) 224-4124

F (202) 224-3149

E-mail: senator@sessions.senate.gov

Birmingham, Alabama

341 Vance Federal Building

1800 Fifth Avenue North

Birmingham, Alabama 35203-2171

(205) 731-1500

(205) 731-0221 - Fax

Huntsville, Alabama

Am South Center Suite 802

200 Clinton Avenue NW

Huntsville, Alabama 35801-4932

(256) 533-0979

(256) 533-0745 - Fax

Mobile, Alabama

Colonial Bank Center, Suite 187

41 North Beltline Highway

Mobile, Alabama 36608-1201

(251) 414-3083

(251) 414-5845 - Fax

Montgomery, Alabama

7550 Halcyon Summit Drive, Suite 150

Montgomery, Alabama 36117

(334) 244-7017

(334) 244-7091 Fax

Mike DeWine (R-OH)

140 Russell Senate Building,

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-2315

F (202) 224-6519

TDD: (202) 224-9921

E-mail: senator_dewine@dewine.senate.gov

Xenia, Ohio Office:

100 West Main Street

2nd Floor

Xenia, OH 45385

Phone: (937) 376-3080

Fax: (937) 376-3387

Cincinnati, Ohio Office:

312 Walnut St.

Suite 2030

Cincinnati, OH 45202

Phone: (513) 763-8260

Fax: (513) 763-8268

Cleveland, Ohio Office:

600 East Superior Avenue

Room 2450

Cleveland, OH 44114

Phone: (216) 522-7272

Fax: (216) 522-2239

Columbus, Ohio Office:

37 West Broad Street

Suite 300

Columbus, OH 43215

Phone: (614) 469-5186

Fax: (614) 469-2982

Marietta, Ohio Office:

121 Putnam Street

Suite 102

Marietta, OH 45750

Phone: (740) 373-2317

Fax: (740) 373-8689

Toledo, Ohio Office:

420 Madison Avenue, Room 1225

Toledo, OH 43604

Phone: (419) 259-7536

Fax: (419) 259-7575

Lindsey Graham (R-SC)

290 Russell Senate Office Building

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-5972

F (202) 224-1189

E Web Form: lgraham.senate.gov/email/email.htm

Greenville

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

101 East Washington Street, Suite 220

Greenville, South Carolina 29601

(864) 250-1417 phone

Florence Office

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

McMillan Federal Building

401 West Evans Street, Suite 226B

Florence, South Carolina 29501

(843) 669-1505 phone

Columbia

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

508 Hampton Street, Suite 202

Columbia, South Carolina 29201

(803) 933-0112 phone

Mount Pleasant

U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham

530 Johnnie Dodd Boulevard, Suite 203

Mount Pleasant, South Carolina 29464

(843) 849-3887 phone

John Warner (R-VA)

225 Russell Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

T (202) 224-2023

F (202) 224-6295

E-mail: senator@warner.senate.gov

Richmond District Office

Main Street Centre II

600 East Main Street

Richmond, Virginia 23219

Telephone: (804) 771-2579

(804) 782-2131 FAX

Abingdon District Office

235 Federal Building

180 West Main Street

P.O. Box 887

Abingdon, Virginia 24210

Telephone: (276) 628-8158

(276) 628-1036 FAX

Roanoke District Office

1003 First Union Bank Building

213 South Jefferson Street

Roanoke, Virginia 24011

Telephone: (540) 857-2676

(540) 857-2800 FAX

Norfolk District Office

4900 World Trade Center

Norfolk, Virginia 23510

Telephone: (757) 441-3079

(757) 441-6250 FAX

Christopher Bond (R-MO)

274 Russell Senate Office Bldg.

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-5721

F (202) 224-8149

E-mail: kit_bond@bond.senate.gov

Main District Office:

308 E. High, #202

Jefferson City, MO 65101

Phone: (573) 634-2488

Fax: (573) 634-6005

Jefferson City

308 E. High, #202

Jefferson City, MO 65101

Phone: (573) 634-2488

Fax: (573) 634-6005

Springfield

1700 S. Campbell, Ste. E

Springfield, MO 65807

Phone: (417) 864-8258

Fax: (417) 864-7519

Cape Girardeau

339 Broadway, #140

Cape Girardeau, MO 63701

Phone: (573) 334-7044

Fax: (573) 334-7352

St. Louis

7700 Bonhomme, #615

St. Louis, MO 63105

Phone: (314) 725-4484

Fax: (314) 725-4268

Kansas City

911 Main St., Ste. 2224

Kansas City, MO 64105

Phone: (816) 471-7141

Fax: (816) 471-7338

John Ensign (R-NV)

364 Russell Senate Office Bldg.

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-6244

F (202) 228-2193

E: Web Form: ensign.senate.gov/contact_john/contactjohn_email.html

LAS VEGAS:

Lloyd George Federal Building

333 Las Vegas Boulevard South, Suite 8203

Las Vegas, Nevada 89101

Phone: (702) 388-6605

Fax: (702) 388-6501

RENO:

Bruce Thompson Federal Building

400 South Virginia Street, Suite 738

Reno, Nevada 89501

Phone: (775) 686-5770

Fax: (775) 686-5729

CARSON CITY:

600 East William Street, Suite 304

Carson City, Nevada 89701

Phone: (775) 885-9111

Fax: (775) 883-5590

Pat Roberts (R-KS)

302 Hart Senate Building

Washington, DC 20510

T (202) 224-4774

F (202) 224-3514

E Web Form: roberts.senate.gov/email.htm

DODGE CITY

100 Military Plaza

PO Box 550

Dodge City, KS 67801

Phone: 620-227-2244

Fax: 620-227-2264

OVERLAND PARK

11900 College Boulevard,

Suite 203

Overland Park, KS 66210

Phone: 913-451-9343

Fax: 913-451-9446

WICHITA

155 N Market St,

Suite 120

Wichita, KS 67202

Phone: 316-263-0416

Fax: 316-263-0273

TOPEKA

Frank Carlson Fed. Bldg.

444 SE Quincy, Rm 392

Topeka, KS 66683

Phone: 785-295-2745

Fax: 785-235-3665

3. DEBUNKING DOCUMENT

House of Representatives’ Bill to Reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, H.R. 1350,

Will Not Accomplish The Goals of Its Proponents

May 2003

According to the House Education and Workforce Committee’s Fact Sheet "Improving Educational Results for Children with Disabilities," the stated goals of the House bill include:

"…Improving Education Results for Children with Disabilities Act calls for reforms to strengthen accountability and results for students, reduce the IDEA paperwork burden for teachers, provide greater flexibility for local school districts to improve early intervention strategies, reduce the number of children who are wrongly placed in special education classes, reduce litigation and restore trust between parents and school districts, and align IDEA with the bipartisan No Child Left Behind Act signed by President Bush in January 2002. NCLB requires federally-funded schools to be accountable for providing a quality education to all students, including students with special needs." (Emphasis supplied)
From:http://edworkforce.house.gov/issues/108th/education/idea/summary.htm

Addressing these stated goals individually:

1. Strengthen accountability and results for students

One stated goal of HR 1350 is to improve student achievement, yet the House bill would remove measures for assessing student progress toward educational goals. There is little if anything in H.R. 1350 that would actually result in increased academic results for children or increase the amount of time that teachers spend with students.

For instance:

Without measurable short-term objectives/benchmarks, parents have no objective information with which to measure the child’s total educational progress.

  1. Restore trust between parents and school districts

The stated goal is that HR 1350 will restore trust between parents and schools, yet the proposed changes would only cause an already unbalanced conflict resolution system to be weighted more heavily against parents -- further eroding what little trust parents have for the system.

On April 9, 2003, Rep. John Boehner (R- OH), Chairman of the House Education & the Workforce Committee, published a document entitled

"The Improving Education Results for Children with Disabilities Act: Separating Fact from Fiction." In this document he states"…The changes in the complaint process proposed in H.R. 1350 are designed to improve communication, restore trust, and strengthen cooperation between parents and school personnel. By providing options such as binding arbitration, parents and schools will have new opportunities to address problems without fear of costly litigation…The one-year statute of limitations proposed in H.R. 1350 is a protection for both parents and schools that will help ensure the timely resolution of complaints. Reforms to the complaint process will help restore trust and allow teachers to feel confident that they can teach without fear of frivolous litigation that could jeopardize educational opportunities for other children with disabilities.

It is disingenuous at best to claim that the changes proposed to the due process protections in H.R. 1350 are beneficial to parents and students.

From the perspective of an individual child’s parents, who are trying desperately to resolve a problem with the school district, H.R. 1350 requires the family to wait longer and jump through more hoops before the case may go to a due process hearing. Then it reduces the number of attorneys available to the family, but not to their opponent -- thus forcing these parents to prepare for and attend the hearing and any other meetings or mediation sessions alone, and provides the confusing "option" of arbitration, among other barriers. It is inconceivable that these changes would result in "restor[ing] trust between parents and school districts"

  1. Reduces the paperwork burden

It is claimed that H.R. 1350 will streamline the IDEA system and free up more time for student related activities. In actuality, it will create new systems and more meetings. New systems and meetings will have to be recorded, funded and staffed, creating additional paperwork and bureaucracy. This change will create confusion, which will lead inevitably to more district/parent conflict. For example:

  1. Reduce Litigation

H.R. 1350 will not reduce litigation because it will create new ambiguities in the law which will take us back 25 years or more, and open up issues long since laid to rest.

After 25 years of implementation, what litigation there has been2 has resulted in a certain degree of clarity in the law. The dramatic changes proposed in H.R. 1350 will result in the re-ligitation of many issues to interpret the new requirements.

To name a few:

In addition, if the state education agency enforced hearing decisions, mediation agreements and arbitration decisions, rather than requiring the parent to go to court when a district refused to comply with an order or agreement, a great deal of litigation could be avoided.

5. Greater flexibility for local school districts to improve early intervention strategies

Actually, right now local school districts have the ultimate discretion to design early intervention programs that meet their needs, including programs that serve non-IDEA eligible students. The only change that H.R. 1350 makes is the opportunity for districts to fund programs for non-IDEA eligible students using IDEA funds. Using IDEA funds for this purpose will only bind school districts with the red tape that is an inevitable result of federal assistance, as well as draining funds that are already insufficient to meet the needs of IDEA eligible students.

Conclusion

Contrary to its stated intent, HR 1350 will not improve the quality of education for students with disabilities, will not improve the relationship between parents and schools, nor will it increase parent participation in helping to create the best educational plan for their children. It will not improve the level of trust between parents and school, if anything it will create more tension between them, nor will it reduce the amount of paperwork that school staff must complete. Most importantly, it undermines the spirit and intent of the IDEA.

Contact: Robert Berlow, COPAA, (301) 912-2281

Diane Smith, NAPAS, (202) 408-9514


1 This data comes from the OSEP Annual Report to Congress, 1999-2000, and includes only students aged 3-21 in the 10 states with the highest number of IDEA eligible students that year (CA, FL, IL, MI, NJ, NY,NC, OH, PA, TX). It is probably a low estimate as the total number of IDEA eligible students has tended to increase over time and because this count does not include children aged Birth – 2.


2 There is little frivolous litigation under the IDEA. In fact, there is little litigation under the IDEA at all. Few due process hearings are requested each year http://www.napas.org/I-3/I-3-f/IDEA Reauth docs/ - _ftn1(approx. .16 % of the total number of Part B students in 1998 requested a hearing1). Fewer still actually proceed to hearing (approx. .054 % of the total number of Part B students in 1998) and an even smaller number proceed through the administrative process to court. This works out to about 1 in 622 students who request a hearing and 1 out of 1844 whose cases actually proceed to hearing. This percentage is based on 1998 numbers, as this is the most recent data available publicly. These figures utilize the total number of students in Part B during that period and the total number of hearings requested and held, as reported to the National Association of State Directors of Special Education ( NASDSE). Therefore this does not account for cases in which parties file more than one hearing request and the reporting periods re: hearings and total student data may not correspond precisely