Fall 2024: ACHIEVE Family Portal Launch

ACHIEVE is Iowa's online data management system. It was developed to support the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The ACHIEVE Governance Council, which makes decisions about the system, consists of two AEA Special Education Directors, two LEA Special Education Directors, and Department of Education staff. 

According to the April 2024 Superintendents Notes published by the Iowa Department of Education, in the Fall of 2024, ACHIEVE's functions will include a family portal that will give parents round-the-clock access to their child's historical information, the ability to view and sign documents electronically, the ability to access their child's records and view their child's real-time progress on goals. https://educate.iowa.gov/pk-12/accreditation-program-approval/school-improvement/superintendent-notes 

Iowa will be the first state in the nation to offer families this type of access to their child’s special education information.

Special Education, Long-Term Suspensions, and Transportation

 I am writing today because during the current school year, I've had an unusual number of cases in which the parents had the same special education issue. 

• The parents in each case have a child with an IEP that includes behavior goals.

• The parents live and work in a town located 15 or more miles from the school building is located to and from which their children ride the school bus.  

• Between late September and mid-December 2023, each of the children was suspended from school for the remainder of the school year after making a statement at school that was regarded as a threat by their school district. 

• All of the children were evaluated and none of them were found to be a danger to themselves or others.

After the children missed ten days of school, their suspensions became a  “change of placement,” requiring their school districts to provide them with services for the rest of the suspension period, to enable them to continue to participate in the general education curriculum and make progress toward their IEP goals. 281-41.530(4)(d).

• Each school district provided those services at a public school or education center located 19 to 36 miles away from the child’s home. 

• To provide these children with a FAPE during the suspension period, their IEP teams should have added transportation as a related service to their IEPs. 281-41.34(1), or, contingent on the parent's willingness to provide the transportation, the school district should have compensated the parent for providing the transportation.

• However, when the parents asked their children’s IEP teams to add this to their IEPs,  school administrators said their school districts do not provide transportation for suspended students, and the IEP teams were unwilling to add transportation to the IEPs.

Until after those parents contacted me and their matters were resolved, every school day they were making two round-trip home-to-facility drives (morning and afternoon).

• Depending on the specific home-to-facility distance from their homes to the facilities, the parents were driving distances ranging from 300 to 700 miles each week. 

• Using the 2024 IRS mileage rate of $0.67, the parents' weekly expenses for those trips ranged from $201.00 to $467.00.

Each time I ponder these cases, I wonder -

• why did the school districts deny transportation when special education law so clearly requires them to provide transportation as a related service when due to the program's location, the children need transportation to access those services? 281-41.412(1), and 

• why didn't the school district and area education agency professionals on the children's IEP teams recognize that denying transportation as a related service under these circumstances was inconsistent with providing the children with a Free Appropriate Public Education?

 

Parents Deserve Drafts of All Documents Before IEP Meetings

Too many IEP meetings begin with an AEA staff member announcing that the team is going to review a new draft IEP (or BIP, safety plan, etc.) that the parent has never seen. Then they proceed to discuss the document. 

This procedure places all or most parents at a keen disadvantage by giving them only enough time to “see” and “react” to the material during the meeting - but not enough time to think about content sufficiently to give meaningful input.

By withholding drafts from parents until IEP meetings commence, school district and AEA members of IEP teams effectively demonstrate an intent to prevent parents from fully participating as members of their children's IEP teams. 

The IDEA requires districts to ensure that the parents of each child with a disability are members of any group that makes decisions about their child's educational placement. 34 CFR 300.327 ; 34 CFR 300.501 (c)(1). This means that districts must go beyond merely allowing parents to be present at IEP meetings. Substantive harm occurs when LEAs seriously infringe upon a parent’s opportunity to participate in the IEP process. See Bd. of Educ. of the Hendrick Hudson Cent. Sch. Dist. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176, 208, 73 L. Ed. 2d 690, 102 S. Ct. 3034 (1982) (“Congress sought to protect individual children by providing for parental involvement . . . in the formulation of the child's individual educational program.”). Parent participation must be more than a mere form; it must be meaningful. See Deal v. Hamilton Cty. Bd. of Educ., 392 F.3d 840, 858 (6th Cir. 2004). 

I strongly recommend that parents give their children's IEP team written notice that they request that at least two school days in advance of their child's IEP meeting, the team provide them with copies of all written documents that will be discussed at the meeting. 

Moreover, Iowa law should not accord fewer rights to parents participating in IEP meetings than it provides to the members of condominium associations who are legally entitled to receive ten days before condominium association board meetings, drafts of all proposals for action to be considered at those meetings. 

To ensure that parents have the opportunity to participate meaningfully in developing their children’s IEPs, I recommend that the Iowa Department of Education amend the Iowa Rules of Special Education to include a rule providing that: “At least two school days before an IEP meeting, the school/AEA is required to provide parents with copies of any written documents that will be addressed at the IEP meeting.”

Related Services and Supplementary Aids and Services

A free appropriate public education (FAPE) is comprised of special education and related services tailored to meet a child's unique needs and supportive services to permit the child to benefit from the school’s instruction, extracurricular programs, and nonacademic settings. See 20 U.S.C. §§ 1401 (9), (26), (33).

“Related Services” refers to services that are connected to a child’s development. They include transportation, speech-language pathology and audiology services; interpreter services; psychological services; physical and occupational therapy; recreation, including therapeutic recreation; counseling services, including rehabilitation counseling; orientation and mobility services; and medical services for diagnostic or evaluation purposes. Related services also include “school health services and school nurse services, social work services in schools, and parent counseling and training. See 281 I.A.C. 41.34,

“Supplementary Aids and Services” means aids, services, and other supports that are provided in classes,  other education-related settings, and in extracurricular and nonacademic settings, to enable children with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate.  refers to the additional supportive services that a child needs in order to benefit from the school’s programs in education, extracurricular, and nonacademic settings, and to enable the child to be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate. See 34 C.F.R. § 300.320(a)(4); 281 I.A.C. 41.42. Examples of supplementary aids and services include adaptive technology, direct services and supports to the child, instruction modifications, instructional delivery, testing accommodations, and support and training for staff who work with the child.

Iowa’s Compulsory Education Law, Enforcement, and Truancy

    I strongly recommend that all parents of school-age children become familiar with Iowa’s compulsory education laws and the school district's policies concerning school attendance. Iowa’s compulsory education statute, Iowa Code chapter 299, is available online at https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/ico/chapter/299.pdf  School attendance policies are generally available on school district websites in the sections on board policies and student handbooks.

The following blog article covers some of the information contained in Iowa Code chapter 299. 

The basic responsibility of parents, guardians, and custodians for school attendance

The parent, guardian, or custodian (referred to below as “parent”) of a child covered by Iowa’s compulsory education law is responsible for ensuring the child attends school. See Iowa Code § 299.1A. It is the duty of the child’s parent to ensure that the child is enrolled in public school (or private school or is receiving competent private instruction or independent instruction) unless the parent has filed a doctor’s certificate with the secretary of the school district demonstrating that the child is physically or mentally unable to attend school, or the child’s presence at school would be injurious to the health of other pupils. See Iowa Code §§ 256B.6 and 299.5. Parents are responsible for following the school district’s policy concerning the reporting of absences.

Which children are covered?

1. Generally, compulsory education children are between the ages of 6 and 16; more specifically:

2.    A child who reaches age 16 on or after September 15, remains of compulsory age until the end of the regular school calendar.

3. A child who reaches age 5 by September 15 and who is enrolled in a school district shall be considered to be of compulsory attendance age unless the child’s parent (or guardian or custodian) notifies the school district in writing that they intend to remove the child from enrollment in the school district.

4. A child who reaches the age of 4 by September 15 and who is enrolled in the statewide public preschool program is considered to be of compulsory attendance age unless the child’s parent (or guardian or custodian) submits written notice to the school. See Iowa Code § 299.1A.

Responsibilities of school boards of public and nonpublic accredited schools

Iowa’s compulsory education law requires the school board of each public and accredited nonpublic school to:

• establish the number of days that students must attend school during the school year (see Iowa Code § 299.1(2);

• adopt a policy concerning acceptable reasons for excused absences (see Iowa Code § 299.1(2)) and the number of unexcused absences (or the number of combined excused and unexcused absences) that will subject the student to consequences for truancy;

• determine reasonable rules for the punishment of students who are truant (see Iowa Code §  299.9;

• maintain the attendance records of students enrolled in their public schools, provided to them by private accredited schools, and by the parents (or guardians or custodians) of compulsory education-age children receiving competent private instruction [within the area covered by the public school district]; 

• attempt to find the reason why a student is truant and use every means available to the school to assure that the child attends school; (see Iowa Code 299.5A). 

• to refer to the county attorney any parent who refuses to accept the school’s attempt to ensure the child’s attendance or any case in which the school’s efforts to assure the child’s attendance have been otherwise unsuccessful (see Iowa Code 299.5A). 

Consequences of Truancy

A child is truant if the child fails to attend school as required by the school board’s attendance policy. See Iowa Code § 299.8. In addition to not receiving an education and the consequences imposed by the child’s school district, a child of compulsory attendance age who does not attend a public school or an accredited nonpublic school, is not receiving competent private instruction or independent private instruction, and does not attend an alternative school or adult education classes, shall not receive an intermediate or full driver’s license until age eighteen. See Iowa Code § 299.1B.

Under Iowa law, truancy charges may be initiated against any parent who fails to ensure that a student attends school. A first offense is punishable by up to a $100.00 fine or ten days in the county jail. Subsequent offenses are punishable by up to a $500.00 fine or twenty days in the county jail. 

Is it too late to file a due process complaint against our son’s former school district?

 Question:   Over a year ago, our son was struggling with reading and his pediatrician referred him for testing at the Hawkeye University Hospitals and Clinics (HUHC). After he was diagnosed with dyslexia, we gave the testing report to the Bean City School District and AEA evaluation team. The team told us they didn’t suspect that our son had a disability in reading because his reading scores weren’t much different from those of his classmates.  

    Last spring I changed jobs and we moved to Corn City. We gave our son’s HUHC report to the Corn City School District and Corn AEA evaluation team. The Corn City team said his reading scores were far below those of students in the Corn City School District. The Corn AEA performed a full evaluation and the school began providing our son with special education services in reading. 

    We told a Corn City school board member about this and asked why there was such a big difference between the two school districts. She got back to us and said that an Iowa Department of Education report showed that almost 90 percent of the 7th-graders in the Corn City district were proficient in reading, but only about half the Bean City 7th-graders were proficient in reading.

    Our son is working hard on reading, but he will need more reading help over the summer to be ready for the amount of reading next fall in his first year of high school. We think the Bean City School District should pay for this because he wouldn’t have been so far behind if it had provided him with special education services in reading. May we file a due process complaint against the Bean City School District?

Response:  No. Although the IDEA doesn’t prohibit parents from filing a due process complaint against a former school district, the Court of Federal Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has held that parents forfeit the right to file a due process action against a former school district unless they file it before their child leaves the former school district. See Thompson by & Through Buckhanon v. Board of the Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 144 F.3d 574, 579 (8th Cir. 1998); see also C.N. v. Willmar Pub. Sch., Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 347, 591 F.3d 624, 631, n.6 (8th Cir. 2010).

    More needs to be said concerning the different eligibility determinations by the two Iowa school districts and AEAs, but I’ll save that for another blog.

When a Child’s IEP Team Proposes an Out-of-District Placement

 [Note: This post does not address cases in which a parent initiates an out-of-district placement or another public agency initiates such a placement.]

Unless a child’s IEP requires another arrangement, the child enrolled in public school must be educated in the school the child would attend if the child did not have a disability. A child with an IEP may not be removed from the resident school district solely because of modifications needed in the general education curriculum. See 281 I.A.C. 41.116(1). 

“Placement” refers to the child's services on the continuum of placements as determined by the IEP team. “Location” refers to the physical place the child receives those services. A local school district cannot override an IEP team’s placement determination. However, only the resident school district may determine the specific out-of-district “location” (classroom, building, or facility). The choice of the location of the services is a school district decision as long as the location selected is consistent with the IEP team’s placement determination. See Letter to Trigg, 50 IDELR 48 (OSEP 2007).

When an IEP team considers placing a child in an out-of-district school, it must address issues including the least restrictive environment and any potential harmful effects on the child or on the quality of services the child needs. An out-of-district placement must have an “educationally relevant purpose” based on the child’s IEP, be located as close as possible to the child’s home, and be determined at least annually. See 281 I.A.C. 41.116. An “educationally relevant purpose" is one required by the IEP to address the child’s unique disability-related needs that interfere with the child’s ability to benefit from the child’s education in the resident school district. For example, if a child with deafness requires a sign language interpreter and one cannot be obtained by the resident school district, placement in an out-of-school district that can provide the interpreter is an “educationally relevant purpose.” In the case of a child whose emotional-behavioral issues impeded the child from benefitting from education in the child's school district of residence and the child requires education in a residential treatment school, that placement would be an “educationally relevant purpose,” rather than placement for treatment. See, e.g., Iowa Admin. Code r 281—41.116; see also C.B. v. Special Sch. Dist., 636 F.3d 981 (8th Cir. 2011).

Out-of-district placement must be at no cost to the child’s parents. When the child lives at home, “at no cost” means the costs of education and transportation. In the case of a residential placement, it means the costs of education, room, board, and transportation (but does not include medical services). See 281 I.A.C. 41.104. The resident district is obligated to pay the actual cost of the special education instructional program. See 281 I.A.C. 41.907(2). If the child’s IEP team recommends a residential placement, the child’s school district and area education agency of residence may not seek the costs of room and board from the child’s parents. See Letter to Hornbeck, 211 IDELR 65 (OSEP 1978). However, with parental consent, they may seek reimbursement from the parent’s public or private insurance. However, a parent’s refusal to provide consent cannot be used to delay or deny a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”). See  281 I.A.C. 41.154. 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5)(B). Federal law prohibits a public school district and AEA from refusing, based on actual or perceived financial inability to pay, placement of a child with an IEP who requires an out-of-district placement to receive a FAPE.

Out-of-district placements are subject to the terms of a written tuition contract that: 

• must ensure that all the requirements of the child’s IEP will be met, 

• require periodic reports to ensure the adequacy and appropriateness of the child’s special education and related services provided, and

• conditions payments on delivery of the child’s special education and related services as required by the child’s IEP in compliance with special education law.  See 281 I.A.C. 41.903(2).

Before the IEP team establishes a child’s out-of-district placement, it must answer the following questions:

• What accommodations, modifications, and adaptations does the child require to be successful in a general education environment?

• Why is it not possible for these accommodations, modifications, and adaptations to be provided within the general education environment?

• What supports are needed to assist the teacher and other personnel in providing these

• accommodations, modifications, and adaptations?

• How will receipt of special education services and activities in the general education environment impact the child?

• How will the provision of special education services and activities in the general education environment impact other students?   See 281 I.A.C. 41.116(4)(a). 

If all or some of the child’s special education would be provided in a special school, the child’s IEP must also address the following additional questions concerning that placement:

• What are the reasons the eligible individual cannot be provided an education program in an integrated school setting?

• What supplementary aids and supports are needed to support the eligible individual in the special education program?

• Why is it not possible for these aids and supports to be provided in an integrated setting?

• What is the continuum of placements and services available for the eligible individual?

See 281 I.A.C. 41.116(4)(b).