IDEA-PART B FINAL REGULATIONS*
PROVISIONS OF SPECIAL INTEREST TO PARENTS
(March 1999)
Below is a description of selected provisions in the final
IDEA-Part B regulations (including certain items that have been
retained, modified, or added since publication of the NPRM) that may
be of special interest to parents**:
General Changes
- All notes in the NPRM have been removed from the final
regulations, and have been addressed, as follows: The substance of
the notes has been (1) added to the text of the regulations if it
was considered to be a requirement; (2) added to Appendix
A (formerly Appendix C) if it was directly relevant to the
Notice of Interpretation on IEPs; or (3) incorporated into the
discussion of applicable comments in the Analysis of Comments and
Changes. All other notes have been deleted.
- Two "Appendices" have been included in the final
regulations: Appendix A -- Notice of
Interpretation on IEPs; and Appendix B
-- Index to IDEA-Part B regulations.
- Three "Attachments" have been added, as follows:
Attachment 1 -- Analysis of Comments and
Changes; Attachment 2 -- Final
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis; and Attachment
3 -- Table showing "Disposition of NPRM Notes in Final
Regulations ..."
Definitions
- Adding "ADD/ADHD" to "Child with a Disability."
"Attention deficit disorder" and "attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder" have been added as conditions that could render a child
eligible under the "other health impairment" category.
(See §300.7(c)(9).)
- "Parent Counseling and Training."
The statement, "helping parents to acquire the necessary skills
that will allow them to support the implementation of their
child's IEP or IFSP" has been added to the definition of "parent
counseling and training."
(See §300.24(b)(7).)
- "Travel Training."
"Travel training" has been added to the definition of "special
education," and defined to mean: "Providing instruction, as
appropriate, to children with significant cognitive disabilities
and any other children who require this instruction, to enable
them to (i) develop an awareness of the environment in which they
live; and (ii) learn the skills necessary to move effectively and
safely from place to place within that environment (e.g., in
school, in the home, at work, and in the community)."
(See §300.26(b)(4).)
Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
- Comprehensive Evaluation.
The evaluation procedures in §300.532
have been amended to provide that each child's evaluation must be
sufficiently comprehensive to identify all of the child's special
education and related services needs, including any needs the
child has that are commonly linked to a disability other than the
disability in which the child has been classified.
(See §300.532(h).)
- Ineligibility -- Lack of Instruction or Limited English
Proficiency.
The final regulations clarify that a child may not be determined
eligible under IDEA-Part B if -- "(1) The determinant factor for
that eligibility determination is-- (i) Lack of instruction in
reading or math; or (ii) limited English proficiency; and (2) the
child does not otherwise meet the eligibility criteria under
§300.7(a)."
(See §300.534(b).)
- Services Based on Identified Need.
The FAPE requirements in §300.300
have been amended to make clear that services provided to an
eligible child must -- (A) address all of the child's special
education and related services needs, and (B) be based on the
identified needs of the child, and not the child's disability
category.
(See §300.300(a)(3).)
- Use of Assistive Technology in a Child's Home If Needed for
FAPE.
On a case-by-case basis, the use of school-purchased assistive
technology devices in a child's home or in other settings is
required if the child's IEP team determines that the child needs
access to those devices in order to receive FAPE.
(See §300.308).
- Extended School Year (ESY) Services.
Section §300.309 (ESY
services) has been amended to clarify that a public agency may not
limit ESY services to particular categories of disability, or
unilaterally limit the type, amount, or duration of those
services.
(See §300.309(a)(3).)
- Graduation policy retained; prior notice and evaluation
addressed.
The final regulations retain the policy position that a student's
right to FAPE is terminated upon graduation with a regular high
school diploma, but is not terminated by any other kind of
graduation certificate or diploma. The regulations also specify
that --
- WRITTEN PRIOR NOTICE IS REQUIRED in accordance with
§300.503, because
graduation from high school with a regular diploma constitutes
a change in placement (see
§300.122(a)(3)). School districts will be expected to
provide the notice "a reasonable time" before proposing to
graduate a student, in order to ensure that there is sufficient
time for the parents and student to plan for, or challenge, the
pending graduation. (See Analysis of comments related to
§300.122.)
- EVALUATION IS NOT REQUIRED BEFORE GRADUATION (i.e.,
the provision requiring that a student be evaluated before
determining that he or she is no longer eligible under Part B
does not apply if the termination of eligibility is due
to graduation with a regular diploma or aging-out under State
law).
(See §300.534(c).)
Children with Disabilities in Public Charter Schools
- Children and Parents Retain All Rights.
A new §300.312 has been
added, which makes it clear that children with disabilities in
public charter schools and their parents retain all rights under
this part, and that compliance with Part B is required regardless
of whether a public charter school receives Part B funds.
Children Experiencing Developmental Delays (§300.313)
- Provisions Related to "Developmental Delay."
A new §300.313 has been
added to -- (1) specify the conditions that States and LEAs must
follow in using the term; and (2) clarify that a State or LEA that
elects to use "developmental delay" also may use one or more of
the disability categories for any child who has been determined
(through the IDEA evaluation procedures) to have a disability and
need special education. Thus, if a child has an identified
disability (e.g., deafness), it would be appropriate to use the
term with that child even if the State or LEA is using
"developmental delay" for other children aged 3 through 9. The
regulations also make clear that a State may adopt a common
definition of "developmental delay" under Parts B and C of the
Act.
Individualized Education Programs (IEPs--§300.340-300.350)
- Involving all Teachers And Service Providers Who
Implement a Child's IEP.
To enhance implementation of each child's IEP, the final
regulations provide that public agencies must ensure that -- (1)
the IEP is accessible to each of the child's teachers and services
providers; and (2) each teacher and provider responsible for
implementing the IEP is informed of his or her responsibilities
and of the specific accommodations, modifications, and supports
that must be provided for the child in accordance with the
IEP.
(See §300.142(b).)
- Regular Education Teachers as IEP Team Members.
The final regulations include the statutory requirements of IDEA
'97 regarding regular education teachers on the IEP team (i.e.,
(A) the team must include at least one teacher, if the child is or
may be participating in the regular education environment (see
§300.344(a)(2)), and
(B) the teacher must, to the extent appropriate, participate in
the IEP process, including assisting in the determination of
positive behavioral interventions, and of supplementary aids,
program modifications, and supports for school personnel that will
be provided for the child.
(See §300.346(e).)
- Inviting "Other Individuals" to be on IEP Team.
To ensure that parents may invite any individual "with knowledge
or special expertise" to be on the IEP team, the final regulations
provide that the determination of the individual's knowledge or
expertise is made by the party who invited the individual (i.e.,
the parents or the public agency).
(See §300.344(c).)
- Informing Parents About "Other Individuals" on IEP
Team.
The final regulations provide that public agencies must inform
parents relating to the participation of other individuals on the
IEP team who have knowledge or special expertise about the child
(i.e., the ability of either party -- the parents or public agency
-- to invite individuals with knowledge or special expertise to be
on the IEP team.
(See §300.345(b).)
- Considering Each Child's Performance on General
Assessments.
The final regulations clarify that, in developing each child's
IEP, the IEP team (in addition to considering the strengths of the
child and the results of evaluations) also must consider "As
appropriate, the results of the child's performance on any general
State or district-wide assessments." (See §300.346(a)(1).)
- Consideration of Special Factors (Added without change from
IDEA '97).
IDEA '97 required the IEP team to consider special factors related
to each child. These statutory considerations, which were not
changed in either the NPRM or the final regulations, include the
following:
- BEHAVIOR THAT IMPEDES LEARNING.
In the case of a child whose behavior impedes his or her
behavior consider, if appropriate, strategies, including
positive behavioral interventions, strategies, and supports to
address that behavior.
(See §300.346(a)(2)(i).)
- LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY.
In the case of a child with limited English proficiency,
consider the language needs of the child as they relate to the
child's IEP.
(See §300.346(a)(2)(ii).)
- BRAILLE NEEDS.
In the case of a child who is blind or visually impaired,
provide for instruction in braille ...unless the IEP team
determines that it is not appropriate for the child.
(See §300.346(a)(2)(iii).)
- COMMUNICATION NEEDS.
"Consider the communication needs of the child, and in the case
of a child who is deaf or hard of hearing, consider the child's
language and communication needs..."
(See §300.346(a)(2)(iv).)
- ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY.
Consider whether the child requires assistive technology
devices and services.
(See §300.346(a)(2)(v).)
- Parents to Receive Copy of IEP.
The final regulations provide that parents must be given a copy of
their child's IEP(s), without cost and without having to request
it.
(See §300.345(f).)
- IEP Accountability; Parent Right to Invoke Due
Process.
The final regulations make clear that (A) each public agency, in
addition to providing services, must make a good faith effort to
assist the child to achieve the goals and objectives or benchmarks
listed in the IEP; and (B) "Nothing in this section limits a
parent's right to ask for revisions of the child's IEP or to
invoke due process procedures if the parent feels that the efforts
required in paragraph (a) of this section are not being made."
(See §300.350.)
Procedural Safeguards
- Independent educational evaluation (IEE).
If a parent requests an IEE, a public agency may ask why the
parent objects to the public evaluation, but may not
require the explanation; and "the public agency may not
unreasonably delay either providing the [IEE] at public
expense or initiating a due process hearing to defend the public
evaluation."
(See §300.502.)
- Parental consent.
The final regulations on parental consent (1) replace "consent"
with "informed parent consent;" (2) add "reevaluation" to the list
of actions requiring consent; and (3) add that "A public agency
may not use a parent's refusal to consent to one service or
activity...to deny the parent or child any other service, benefit,
or activity of the public agency, except as provided by this
part." (See §300.505.)
The regulations also provide that "With regard to services
required to provide FAPE to an eligible child under this part, a
public agency may access a parent's private insurance proceeds
only if the parent provides informed consent consistent with
§300.500(b)(1)
[definition of "consent"]."
(See §300.142(f).)
- Mediation.
The final regulations provide that if a mediator is not selected
on a random (e.g., a rotation) basis from the State's list, both
parties are involved in selecting the mediator and agree with the
selection of the individual who will mediate.
(See §300.506(b)(2)(ii).)
- Change of Placement Based on Hearing Officer
Decision.
The final regulations provide that if a State hearing or review
officer's decision agrees with the parent's position that a change
in the child's placement is appropriate, the decision must be
implemented at that point, even if the public agency appeals that
decision. This provision, which is consistent with most of the
court decisions that have addressed this question, ensures that
children will not remain in inappropriate placements for prolonged
periods of time while a public agency appeals a decision in the
parent's favor.
(See §300.514(c).)
Evaluation-Eligibility; Least Restrictive Environment
(LRE).
- Procedures for Determining Eligibility--Obtaining Parent
Input.
"Parent input" has been added to the variety of sources from which
the public agency will draw in interpreting evaluation data for
the purpose of determining a child's eligibility under this
part.
(See §300.535(a)(1).)
- LRE--Placements.
A new §300.552(e) has
been added that prohibits the removal of a child with a disability
from an age-appropriate regular classroom solely because of needed
modifications in the general curriculum.
State Complaint Procedures
- Remedies for Denial of Appropriate Services.
The final regulations provide that if an SEA, in resolving a
complaint, finds a failure to provide appropriate services to a
child with a disability, the SEA must address: "(1) How to
remediate the denial of those services, including, as appropriate,
the awarding of monetary reimbursement or corrective action, which
could include compensatory services or other corrective action
appropriate to the needs of the child..."
(See §300.660(b).)
- Complaints vs due process hearings.
A new §300.661(c)
has been added to clarify that -- (A) if an issue in a complaint
is the subject of a due process hearing, that issue (but not any
issue outside of the hearing) would be set aside until the
conclusion of the hearing; (B) the decision on an issue in a due
process hearing is binding; and (C) a public agency's failure to
implement a due process decision would have to be resolved by the
SEA.
Discipline Procedures
Introduction.
Prior to enactment of the IDEA Amendments of 1997, the statute only
specifically addressed the issue of discipline in a provision that
allowed school personnel to remove a child to an interim alternative
educational placement for up to 45 days if the child brought a gun to
school or to a school function. The 1997 Amendments incorporated
prior court decisions and Department policy that had held that -- (1)
schools could remove a child for up to ten school days at a time for
any violation of school rules as long as there was not a pattern of
removals; (2) a child with a disability could not be long-term
suspended or expelled from school for behavior that was a
manifestation of his or her disability; and (3) services must
continue for children with disabilities who are suspended or expelled
from school.
In addition, the 1997 Amendments (1) expanded the authority of
school personnel regarding the removal of a child who brings a gun to
school, to also apply to all dangerous weapons and to the knowing
possession of illegal drugs or the sale or solicitation of the sale
of controlled substances; and (2) added a new ability of schools to
request a hearing officer to remove a child for up to 45 days if
keeping the child in his or her current placement is substantially
likely to result in injury to the child or to others. The Amendments
also added new provisions that require schools to assess a child's
troubling behavior and develop positive behavioral interventions to
address that behavior, and that describe how to determine whether the
behavior was a manifestation of the child's disability.
The final regulations incorporate the statutory provisions
described above, and provide additional specificity on a number of
key issues:
Removals of Up to Ten School Days at a Time.
- The regulations clarify that school personnel may remove a
child with a disability for up to ten school days, and for
additional removals of up to ten school days for separate acts of
misconduct, as long as the removals do not constitute a
pattern.
Providing Services During Periods of Disciplinary
Removal.
- Schools do not need to provide services during the first ten
school days in a school year that a child is removed.
- During any subsequent removal that is for ten school days or
less, schools provide services to the extent determined necessary
to enable the child to appropriately progress in the general
curriculum and appropriately advance toward achieving the goals of
his or her IEP. In cases involving removals for ten school days or
less, school personnel, in consultation with the child's special
education teacher, make the service determination.
- During any long-term removal for behavior that is not a
manifestation of a child's disability, schools provide services to
the extent determined necessary to enable the child to
appropriately progress in the general curriculum and appropriately
advance toward achieving the goals of his or her IEP. In cases
involving removals for behavior that is not a manifestation of the
child's disability, the child's IEP team makes the service
determination.
Conducting Behavioral Assessments and
Developing Behavioral Interventions.
- Meetings of a child's IEP team to develop a behavioral
assessment plan, or (if the child has one) to review the child's
behavioral intervention plan, are only required when the child has
first been removed from his or her current placement for more than
ten school days in a school year, and when commencing a removal
that constitutes a change in placement.
- If other subsequent removals occur, the IEP team members
review the child's behavioral intervention plan and its
implementation to determine if modifications are necessary, and
only meet if one or more team members believe that modifications
are necessary.
Change of Placement; Manifestation Determinations.
- The regulations provide that a change of placement occurs if a
child is removed for more than ten consecutive school days or is
subjected to a series of removals that constitute a pattern
because they cumulate to more than ten school days in a school
year, and because of factors such as the length of each removal,
the total amount of time the child is removed, and the proximity
of the removals to one another.
- Manifestation determinations are only required if a school is
implementing a removal that constitutes a change of
placement.
* On October 22, 1997, a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) was published in the Federal Register to
amend the regulations under Part B of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The purposes of the NPRM were to
implement changes made by the IDEA Amendments of 1997, and make other
changes that facilitate the implementation of Part B. The changes
made since the NPRM are based mainly on public comments
received.
** The description of changes made to
specific sections of the regulations since the NPRM does not include
all changes made to those sections, nor does it include all changes
in which parents may have an interest. (See "Major Changes..." in the
preamble to the final regulations for a more complete
description.)
This document was prepared by OSEP. It has been formatted
by Education Development Center, Inc, for the IDEA Practices web site, a service
of the OSEP-funded ASPIIRE and ILIAD Linking Partnership Projects at The Council
for Exceptional Children. The material was transferred to the discover IDEA
CD 2002 by the Western Regional Resource Center. Every attempt has been made
to faithfully reproduce the original content.