NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SERVICE

Source: http://www.chadd.org/press.cfm?cat_id=10&subcat_id=29&press_year=2003&press_id=65

LETTER TO CHAIRMAN CASTLE

March 27, 2003

The Honorable Michael Castle

Chairman

Subcommittee on Education Reform

Education and the Workforce Committee

U.S. House of Representatives

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Chairman Castle:

Last week, you introduced H.R.1350, the Improving Education Results for Children with Disabilities Act of 2003. This bill reauthorizes the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). After an initial review

of the bill, the undersigned members of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Education Task Force have determined that we cannot support the bill as drafted. Several core provisions are of particular concern.

First, the changes to the procedural safeguard provisions in Section 615(j) will dramatically weaken the rights of students with disabilities to receive a free, appropriate public education and will do little to make schools

safer and more conducive to learning.

Second, H.R. 1350 makes significant changes to the Individualized Education Program provisions of the bill. We are concerned that the accountability provisions of No Child Left Behind Act are not sufficiently in place to ensure that parents will have the information they need about their child's progress if the short-term objectives and benchmarks are eliminated. Until the NCLB accountability provisions are fully implemented for students with disabilities across the country, each child's IEP should include benchmarks and short-term objectives. We also have significant concerns that the proposed three-year IEP will result in students not receiving appropriate services.

Third, H.R. 1350 creates a new pre-referral program to which 15 percent of IDEA funds can be dedicated. While we support the policy of providing educational support services to students who need additional academic and behavioral support, we believe general education funds should also contribute to this program. Moreover, the bill continues the provision in current law that enables 20 percent of IDEA funds to be used as local funds, and adds a new provision that these resources should be directed to fund programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Thus, the bill would enable a significant portion of IDEA funds to be used to finance activities that are the responsibility of general education. While we support collaboration and joint funding, in this instance special education is being asked to finance more than its fair share.

There are dozens of other provisions that seriously concern us. The Improving Education Results for Children with Disabilities Act of 2003 must be significantly revised. CCD Education Task Force members include organizations representing students with disabilities and their families, teachers, related services personnel, program operators, state agencies and disability advocates. We stand ready to work with you to develop IDEA legislation that will increase opportunities for students with disabilities while improving public education. We hope to have the opportunity to work with you before H.R. 1350 is marked up.

We urge you not to rush H.R. 1350 to mark up without the support of the families and advocates of the more than 6 million children with disabilities who rely on IDEA for their future.

Thank you for considering our views.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

American Association on Mental Retardation

American Music Therapy Association

Association of University Centers on Disabilities

Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law

Children and Adults with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder

Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and

Programs for the Deaf

Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders

Council for Learning Disabilities

Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates

Easter Seals

Epilepsy Foundation

Higher Education Consortium for Special Education

Learning Disabilities Association

National Alliance for the Mentally Ill

National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems

National Association of School Psychologists

National Association of Social Workers

National Coalition on Deaf-Blindness

National Center for Learning Disabilities

National Down Syndrome Congress

National Mental Health Association

School Social Work Association of America.

Spina Bifida Association of America

TASH

Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children

The Arc of the United States

The International Dyslexia Association

Tourette Syndrome Association

United Cerebral Palsy Association

 

Source: http://www.tash.org/govaffairs/ccd_letter0403.htm

CCD letter to House members regarding changes to IDEA

April 4, 2003

Members of the Committee on Education and the Workforce
US House of Representatives
Washington, DC

Dear Committee Member:

On Wednesday, the Subcommittee on Education Reform marked up a substitute version of HR 1350. This bill is a revised version of the introduced bill, which reauthorizes the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. After an initial review of the bill, the undersigned members of the Education Task Force of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities continue to have significant concerns regarding many provisions in the bill. Because the bill is so long and the changes are so numerous and complex, we are unable to raise all of them in the short time frame set by the Committee. However, we begin with these.

Discipline
We recognize that there are situations in which removal from the classroom is an appropriate disciplinary response for students with disabilities. We believe that current law, and in particular, amendments made to IDEA 1997, permit such removals and strike a fair balance between effective discipline and providing appropriate supports for children with disabilities. Even with current law protections, students with disabilities are over-represented among students who are expelled. This is despite the fact that few of those who are removed from school present serious dangers to students or staff. Removing manifestation determinations and requirements related to functional behavioral assessments and behavioral intervention plans unfairly denies students with disabilities access to the most appropriate educational services and puts them at significantly greater risk. Without appropriate educational services, school dropout rates and delinquency will increase and communities will be less safe. The provision currently in the bill is completely unacceptable.

Ensuring Highly Qualified Personnel
The shortage of qualified personnel has hampered the full implementation of IDEA for 25 years. In No Child Left Behind, the Congress determined that every child should have a highly qualified teacher. It is critical that the same standard be applied to special education and related services personnel. Without such application, we cannot expect to increase the achievement levels or outcomes for students with disabilities served by IDEA. Indeed, virtually every contentious issue related to IDEA – discipline, disproportionate representation of minorities, over-identification of students referred to special education and others – needs to be addressed by ensuring an adequate supply of appropriately trained and highly qualified personnel.

While the bill makes some important progress in this area, critical problems remain. We applaud the elimination of the three-year provision that allows unqualified teachers to teach students with disabilities. However, the elimination of the "highest requirement" provision for related services providers serves to lower standards at a time when high standards were never more important. A lack of standards related to state certification in special education will continue to allow people without sufficient special education skills to be certified as special education teachers. Personnel standards in Part C should be consistent with those set in Part B. In addition, we believe that related services personnel should be included throughout all aspects of Part D activities. Finally, the significant infusion of funds needed to address the shortage of highly qualified special education teachers and related services personnel is not provided for.

Changes in the IEP
We acknowledge the changes the Subcommittee made in postponing the elimination of short-term objectives and benchmarks until 2005-2006 for some children, while retaining them for others. However, our concerns remain in terms of eliminating these critical provisions at any time. In addition, we are concerned that the three-year IEP, as constructed in the bill, will result in students not receiving appropriate services. Without a scientific research base to indicate the efficacy of eliminating short-term objectives and benchmarks or of utilizing a three-year IEP, the consequences of such provisions remain unknown.

Voluntary Binding Arbitration
Voluntary Binding Arbitration raises the issues in a Special Education context of "how binding is binding?" Voluntary binding arbitration is inappropriate in this situation where a child's needs change over time. What may work for this school year may change as the child develops new skills. It will further be complicated by the potential three year IEP. Further legal disputes will arise about how long the arbitration is binding. The bargaining positions of the parties are too unequal to rely on binding arbitration when one party is an individual parent and the other is a school district.

Use of IDEA funds
The bill has set aside 15% of IDEA funds for pre-referral services, support services required by No Child Left Behind and other activities. In addition, 20% of increases in appropriations for Part B may be used as local funds. While the activities authorized may have merit, we remain concerned about funding them with the insufficient supply of Part B funds that cannot even sufficiently address the needs of students with disabilities who are currently served under the law. While we support collaboration and joint funding, in this instance special education is being asked to finance more than its fair share.

Research
The bill proposes to move the research functions under IDEA out of the Office of Special Education Programs and into the Institute for Educational Sciences. We oppose this move. In an era when scientifically based research should provide the foundation for programs and services, it is critical that research be directly linked to programs and practices. The research mandate for IDEA is critically tied to the mission of IDEA. Administering these programs in the same agency is critical to ensure the infusion of research-based practice throughout IDEA programs.

There are dozens of other provisions in the bill that concern us. We urge you to modify HR 1350 prior to full Committee markup to address the concerns we have raised. We are ready to work with you to develop these much needed changes in the bill.

CCD Education Task Force is comprised of national organizations representing students with disabilities and their families, teachers, related services personnel, program operators, state agencies and disability advocates. We look forward to working with you to develop IDEA legislation that will increase academic and functional outcomes for students with disabilities.

Thank you for considering our views.

American Association on Mental Retardation
American Association of University Affiliated Programs
American Counseling Association
American Music Therapy Association
American Occupational Therapy Association
American Physical Therapy Association
Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
Children and Adults with Attention Deficit/Hpyeractivity Disorder
Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates
Easter Seals
Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health
Higher Education Consortium for Special Education
National Association of Developmental Disabilities Councils
National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems
National Association of Social Workers
National Center for Learning Disabilities
National Coalition on Deaf-Blindness
National Down Syndrome Congress
National Mental Health Association
School Social Work Association of America
TASH
Teacher Education Division/Council for Exceptional Children
The Arc of the US
The International Dyslexia Association
The Learning Disabilities Association of America
Tourette Syndrome Association
UCP

 

 

Source: http://www.bridges4kids.org/articles/3-03/NAPAS3-25-03.html

Action Alert from the National Association of Protection & Advocacy Systems (NAPAS)

Your feedback is requested by NAPAS regarding IDEA.

from NAPAS, March 25, 2003

For more articles like this visit http://www.bridges4kids.org

Download the list of contact numbers for U.S. Legislators - click here (pdf size=111kb).

On Tuesday, March 25, 2002, the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Service organizations issued a nationwide Action Alert prompted by the imminent passage of a Republican sponsored bill to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The bill is on a fast track and could be reported out of committee and put to a vote on the House floor in less than one week. Arguing that "critical IDEA protections" are threatened by the bill, NAPAS called on parents and the public to contact members of Congress. The NAPAS Action Alert follows:

BACKGROUND

House Republicans introduced their bill to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act on March 19th. This bill (H.R. 1350) places free and appropriate public education opportunities for children with disabilities in jeopardy and severely limits the due process rights of parents. It is a legislative proposal that was developed largely without the input of family organizations or disability advocates.

The leaders of the House Education and Workforce Committee are planning to "mark-up" this bill on THURSDAY, MARCH 27th!!! A mark-up is when Members of the Committee debate the merits of the bill and make changes. After a bill is marked-up, it is voted on by the Committee and the next step is House floor action. A one-week turnaround does not allow parents or advocates sufficient time to read and comment on a bill that will have a major impact on the lives of children with disabilities and their families.

This bill is full of problems. A few of the most critical are listed below.

The bill would Allow IEPs to be written for three years rather than one year periods; it removes short term objectives which provide parents with useful information about
the student's progress on important academic and non-academic goals.

It would decimate the current IDEA discipline provisions; it would give schools the unilateral ability to send children with disabilities to Interim Alternate Educational Settings for simple violations of the school code; students receive fewer services in these settings and it would result in schools filled with students with disabilities; there is no clear "return" to the regular classroom; there would be no more Manifestation Determination Review (where the decision is made whether or not a behavior is related to the child’s disability); there would be no more functional behavioral assessments or behavioral intervention plans.

It would establish a due process option of "voluntary binding arbitration" and, while on the surface this option might seem like a good idea, the problem is that parents don't always know all of their rights and options; if a parent selects voluntary binding arbitration, he or she loses all rights to appeal; if an arbitrator makes a bad decision, it can be very hard to overturn.

It would make parents wait one month before any complaint they raise could go to due process, regardless of the problem or issue.
It would establish a system of pre-referral interventions -- which may be a good idea -- however, it would divert already scarce funds away from IDEA-eligible students to provide services for non-IDEA eligible students.

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

Contact the Leaders and Members of the House Education and the Workforce Committee AND the Members of the Education Reform Subcommittee and urge them to delay action on H.R. 1350 (see list below).

Tell them that they should not rush to act on the bill without the support of the families and advocates of the more than six million children with disabilities who rely on IDEA for their future. Families and advocates do not support this bill. (Some legislators have been told that we do agree with the bill, they need to hear clearly that we do not.)

Tell them that the outcome of any IDEA action should not only protect but also strengthen the educational services and supports available to children with all types of disabilities. This bill does not do that.

Tell them that the outcome should protect and strengthen the procedural safeguards that are in place to help ensure that children get the services they need AND should protect and strengthen the due process protections for these children and their families. This bill does not do that.

Use personal stories of IDEA successes!!!!

Please let Kathy McGinley at NAPAS know what your Members say – Kathy@napas.org or 202-408-9514.