• Module
  • Challenge
  • Initial Thoughts
  • Perspectives & Resources
  • Wrap Upwardly
  • Assessment

What is the IEP procedure?

Page four: Procedural Requirements: Guidelines & Common Errors

Legislation and Litigation setting

[A]n IEP must exist drafted in compliance with a detailed set of procedures (that) emphasize collaboration among parents and educators and require careful consideration of the child's individual circumstances.

On the previous page, we introduced you to IDEA's procedural requirements for providing special education services and supports to students with disabilities. On this page, nosotros will brainstorm to offering more than specific guidance near how school personnel should actually implement these requirements in practice. We'll also point out some common procedural errors to avoid.

Procedural Requirement Guidelines

Although non an exhaustive list, the practices outlined below can support the evolution of a technically sound IEP. School personnel who engage in these practices are also more probable to develop an educationally meaningful loftier-quality IEP that meets the needs of students with disabilities.

One major purpose of Idea'south procedural requirements is to ensure that parents are meaningfully involved throughout the IEP procedure. The information presented in the table below details what this requirement involves in more specific terms.

Step Requirements
Referral Parents must give informed, written consent earlier their kid tin can be tested. Parents may also initiate a special pedagogy referral for their kid.
Evaluation The student must be assessed in all areas of concern and in areas of potential needs voiced by her parents. Parents likewise accept the right to request an evaluation of their kid.
Eligibility Determination Parents must be part of the team that makes the eligibility decision, which is based on the evaluation results.
IEP Evolution Parents are equal members of the IEP team and, as such, their input regarding all aspects of the IEP must be considered and respected.
IEP Implementation Before the student'due south IEP tin exist implemented, her parents must give informed, written consent. Following implementation of the IEP, the parents must be informed in an ongoing manner regarding their child'southward progress toward meeting her IEP goals and objectives.
Annual Review As function of the IEP team, parents are involved when the team re-convenes to review and revise the IEP.
Re-evaluation As with the previous stages of the process, parental input as part of the IEP team is crucial. If the team determines that a full evaluation is required at this point, the parents must again requite informed written consent.

In addition, schoolhouse personnel should:

  • Make concerted efforts to schedule IEP team meetings at times when parents are able to attend. Work schedules, transportation issues, and lack of childcare are but some of the real-world issues that bear on parents' power to accept office in IEP meetings, and school personnel should not but exist aware of them merely they should too brand plans to answer when they practice occur.
  • Send a written invitation to the parents that includes the date and time, location, purpose, and attendees. This invitation must also inform the parents most their correct to invite individuals with special knowledge or expertise about their kid (e.g., advocate, family friend, clergy) to be a member of the IEP team.
  • Conform to have trained translators nowadays to assist parents who are not fluent English language speakers.
  • Avert using educational jargon and acronyms that are likely to be unfamiliar to parents.
  • Fully inform parents nigh their rights and procedural safeguards.

Did You Know?

Also often, the packet of procedural rights information received past parents during IEP meetings is characterized by legalistic jargon and small print. Common parental complaints are that this information is not explained, that time constraints preclude school-based squad members from answering their questions, and that their participation is trivialized when schoolhouse personnel note that parents "probably don't desire to waste matter meeting time going over information technology" or joke that, because parents receive a re-create of it every yr, they probably take plenty copies to "wallpaper their business firm." Parents are then asked to sign a form verifying that they have received the information. In addition to beingness procedurally unsound, such practices too diminish the parents' part as an equal member of the IEP team. To better serve parents, consider having a parent-friendly version of this information, in addition to the total bundle. The example below was developed through a collaboration between the Tennessee Department of Education and Stride (Support and Preparation for Exceptional Parents).

Quick Guide to Parent Rights and Responsibilities in Special Didactics

Call back from the previous guideline that parents must give written informed consent for the referral for evaluation, and that the subsequent evaluation must assess all areas of student needs, including those areas in which parents have voiced concerns. The evaluation should get together information on relevant functional, developmental, and bookish skills. The data gathered should be sufficient to determine whether the student has i or more of the Idea-stipulated disabilities and requires special education services. No single cess or test can be used as the sole determinant of this eligibility. Using more than i assessment or test not only helps to avoid misidentification merely the test results are also used to determine the content of the IEP.

The evaluation should incorporate multiple assessment tools that:

  • Are not racially or culturally biased
  • Are administered in the student's native language or other form of communication (due east.g., sign language) that volition provide the almost accurate data nigh the student'southward functioning, unless information technology is non feasible to exercise and then
  • Are technically sound (i.east., valid and reliable)
  • Are administered by trained professionals in accordance with the test's instructions
  • Are individually selected to assess all areas of a student'due south suspected inability (e.g., cerebral, behavioral, physical, social-emotional, and developmental), equally well as those well-nigh which parents accept concerns
  • Collect relevant data on the student's academic and functional skills
  • Identify all of the educatee'south educational needs, especially special education and related services

In improver, background information is collected from a variety of sources, including:

  • Parents, to gain insight into educatee characteristics (e.1000., developmental milestones, social skills)
  • School personnel, to get a clearer picture of current academic and behavioral concerns
  • Schoolhouse records, to obtain a history of the student's school performance
  • Medical records, when applicable
  • Classroom observations, particularly when student behavior is of business organisation (east.g., the educatee is frequently off-task, the educatee exhibits high levels of frustration)

This data gathered during the student's evaluation will guide IEP team decisions regarding needed special education and related services and when and where (e.g., LRE) these services volition be provided.

For Your Information

  • When students transfer from 1 public agency (eastward.g., school district) to another within the same school twelvemonth, those agencies must coordinate to ensure prompt completion of the pupil's full evaluation.
  • The guidelines higher up also use to the three-year reevaluation step of the IEP process.

Idea provides specific timeframes within which central aspects of the IEP process must be completed. If states have state-specific timelines, IEP teams need to recognize and follow those. States are costless to adjust the IDEA timeframes, simply only to speed up the process. The simply exception is the evaluation timeline, which states are permitted to extend.

Footstep Requirements
Referral IDEA does not specify timelines for referral.
Evaluation The evaluation must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation or inside state-established timelines.
Eligibility Determination Although Thought does non specify a timeline for making the eligibility determination, some states practice. In the absence of a land timeline, the eligibility decision should be made as before long as possible later the evaluation is completed.
IEP Development The meeting to develop the IEP must be conducted within thirty days of the determination that the kid has a disability and is eligible for special education and related services.
IEP Implementation The special education and related services identified in the IEP should be fabricated available as before long as possible post-obit the development of the IEP. Although no specific time constraints are provided, the expectation is that the services will start immediately (e.g., the adjacent twenty-four hour period), except when the IEP was developed during a schoolhouse break (e.g., summer vacation) or when special circumstances (e.grand., the demand to arrange transportation) necessitate a short delay.
Annual Review The IEP should be reviewed inside 12 months subsequently the previous IEP was developed.
Reevaluation The educatee should be reevaluated at least one time every iii years.

Every person on the IEP squad has unique noesis and expertise relevant to the IEP procedure. The absenteeism of whatever 1 of these individuals creates a potential loss of that noesis and expertise, jeopardizing the quality of the IEP and the subsequent provided services. Every bit a result, the district's ability to provide FAPE will have been compromised. A school-based squad fellow member demand not attend an IEP meeting at which that person'south areas of curriculum or related services are non to be discussed or modified, but the parent and commune must agree to their absence in writing. If the member'south area is being discussed, excusal may still be granted by a written understanding, provided that team fellow member submits written input to the parent and district prior to the meeting.

Idea clearly details the required components of the IEP document, which systematically build on each other to provide an individualized instruction for the student. If components are missing, the IEP tin no longer represent a cohesive program. These IEP components, to be discussed more on the next page, include:

  1. Present levels of academic achievement and functional operation
  2. Measurable annual goals
  3. A description of how progress toward meeting goals will exist measured and reported
  4. A statement of the needed special didactics and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed research to the extent practicable, and a statement of the program modifications or supports for school personnel
  5. An explanation of the extent, if any, to which the child will not participate with not-disabled children in general instruction class
  6. A statement of accommodations, if any, necessary in assessments and/or in assessment standards
  7. The projected date, frequency, location and duration of services

School personnel must make concerted efforts to ensure that the student makes appropriate progress, and they practise then by implementing the IEP as planned. Each person with instructional or service provision responsibilities must:

  • Have admission to the IEP
  • Understand the information independent therein
  • Understand their function in subsequent implementation
  • Make concerted efforts to help the student attain her goals
  • Frequently and systematically monitor her progress

When the progress monitoring data indicate that the student is not making adequate progress, the IEP team must meet to determine:

  • Whether the IEP is being adhered to
  • Whether the supports and services are being implemented properly
  • Possible reasons for the student's lack of progress, and make adjustments accordingly
  • How ongoing progress monitoring will be conducted and communicated to the parents

Every bit noted earlier, the IEP is like a contract in that it reflects a written, signed commitment to carry out the services and supports outlined in its pages. School professionals must empathize that failure to carry out the responsibilities and services outlined in the IEP puts the district, and potentially themselves, at legal adventure.

These procedural guidelines should not only be followed during the full IEP process that starts when a student is initially referred for testing, only also when a educatee who is already receiving special teaching services has an upcoming annual review. In the interviews below, 2 teachers share some insights on the importance of positive parent engagement early in the annual review process.

Transcript: Waldrian Boyd

You have to build relationships. Edifice relationships is the central component to meeting the students' needs, meeting the parents' needs. Every year, that child needs some type of evaluation of that IEP. I want to meet with parents so we can discuss what this IEP entails, considering parents might not know the questions to ask. The first matter that I ask them is, "What are your concerns, and what are the goals that you desire for your kid for this year?" And I feel like that allows the parent to open up, to say, "Yes, here are my concerns." I just feel like that's very of import considering they know their child better than we practise. And they run across different things at dwelling than nosotros do at school. They have that bird'due south eye view of their child and can communicate that information to assistance develop that IEP.

Tamara McLean

And then in the state of Tennessee, if a typhoon of the IEP was developed prior to the IEP coming together, parents should have admission to that draft at to the lowest degree 48 hours prior to that meeting. I like that because I think parents walking in having no thought what we're about to say, where we're about to say their kid is in terms of present levels and PLAAFPs, that's a lot of data to take in, in that meeting, so process. If they're hitting with something that they don't await, it can be and then emotional that they don't really hear anything else we say for the rest of that meeting and may not process information technology for a day or 2 subsequently they've left the coming together, which makes information technology really hard for them to be a team member because they're caught up in something that took them by surprise.

Mutual Procedural Errors

At that place are a number of serious procedural errors that IEP teams should avoid. Of particular business organisation are those that inhibit parental participation, compromise a student'due south FAPE, or deprive the educatee of his or her educational benefits. A few of the more mutual procedural errors are described below.

The Supreme Court's decisions in Board of Instruction five. Rowley (1982) and Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District (2017) emphasized the importance of the collaboration between school personnel and a educatee's parents throughout the IEP process, evidence that this procedural right is vigorously protected by the courts.

Program — The special education services and supports

Placement — The educational setting in which the services volition exist provided

Predetermination refers to situations in which school-based personnel on an IEP team brand decisions (e.grand., develop IEP goals, determine services and placement) prior to holding the IEP coming together. Past doing and so, they tacitly cut parents out of the decision-making process. School personnel tin have informal discussions earlier the IEP meeting, and they can come to the meeting with suggestions and opinions. Nonetheless, they cannot brand final program or placement decisions until the actual coming together in which the student'southward parents are involved.

Shoehorning — A term sometimes used to refer to the procedural mistake of selecting the student's placement earlier her plan has been determined.

Earlier determining placement, the IEP team must first proceeds a comprehensive pic of the student and develop her program (e.yard., goals, services, and supports). Subsequently, "each child's educational placement must exist determined on an individual example-by-case footing depending on each child's unique educational needs and circumstances, rather than past the kid's category of disability" (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F. R. §300.116(b)(2006)). In other words, in one case the student's program has been determined, just and so tin can the squad use that information to make up one's mind the placement in which a student'southward needs tin all-time be met.

IDEA specifies the required members of a properly constituted IEP team. An IEP squad that does not include the required members is not properly constituted and has failed to incorporate the expertise needed to develop a high-quality IEP.

To restate, all of the IEP's components come together to create a cohesive program for the student. These are:

  1. Present levels of academic achievement and functional operation
  2. Measurable annual goals
  3. A description of how progress toward coming together goals will exist measured and reported
  4. A statement of the needed special education and related services and supplementary aids and services, based on peer-reviewed inquiry to the extent practicable, and a argument of the plan modifications or supports for schoolhouse personnel
  5. An explanation of the extent, if any, to which the educatee volition not participate with non-disabled students in the full general educational activity classroom
  6. A statement of accommodations, if whatsoever, necessary in assessments and/or in assessment standards
  7. The projected date, frequency, location, and duration of services

When components are missing, the quality of the IEP is compromised. This is an hands avoidable procedural error.

In many cases, procedural errors can exist addressed or corrected by re-convening the IEP team. In other situations, particularly those in which parents and school personnel disagree, either political party can initiate dispute-resolution procedures (i.east., country complaints, mediation, resolution session, due procedure hearing). If the dispute advances to a due process hearing, an impartial hearing officer reviews the available evidence and makes a ruling. Of primary consideration is the caste of harm caused to the student's special education programme and her FAPE as a event of the procedural violation. More specifically, Idea specifies that hearing officers can only rule against a school if procedural violations have resulted in one or more of the post-obit:

  • Impeded the educatee's right to receive a FAPE
  • Impeded the parents' opportunity to participate in the educational decision-making procedure
  • Caused a deprivation of educational benefits

Activity

Revisit the Challenge: Common Procedural Errors

As yous saw in the Challenge, Mr. Anaya had some concerns about the style the IEP process was being handled at Washington Canton Elementary. For each of the examples below, decide whether a procedural mistake occurred and, if so, place what type of error was committed.

ane. Mrs. Esposito has been identified equally Sienna's special instruction teacher. Is this a procedural error?

Correct!

Select the type of procedural error:

Correct! Even though the IEP meeting has not yet occurred, the assistant principal, Mrs. Pederson, assumes that Sienna will be placed in Mrs. Esposito'south class considering "She has an available slot in her classroom." Only afterwards the IEP team members review Sienna's evaluation results, identify her needs, annual goals, and services should they determine where she volition receive these services. Placement should not be determined based on classroom availability. This state of affairs is an example of "shoehorning."

Incorrect. Attempt once again.

Incorrect. Try again.

2. Mrs. Esposito is developing parts of Sienna'southward IEP by selecting IEP goals from a bank of computerized options. Is this a procedural error?

Correct!

Select the type of procedural mistake:

Incorrect. Endeavour once again.

Incorrect. Try again.

Correct! Every student's IEP should be individualized to meet her unique needs. Though in that location may be some commonalities across broad goals for some students (e.g., to improve decoding skills), the charge per unit of growth, level of mastery, and timelines for success should be individually determined after input and discussion with all members of the IEP squad.

larry wexler

Mind as Larry Wexler offers some boosted insight on the apply of computerized IEPs (time: 0:53).

Larry Wexler, EdD
U.S. Department of Educational activity
Office of Special Education Programs
Managing director, Research to Practice Division

My advice relative to canned electronic IEPs is there'south nothing inherently wrong with them equally long as they, in fact, are meeting the unique needs of that child.

Merely just filling out the paperwork and putting a scope and sequence of goals and objectives that aren't based on what the child needs, too equally not specifying the types of services and supports that the child needs to progress, a is non the way to get. And certainly parents ought to exist aware of the fact that this should be unique to their kid. And that's the bottom line. It's individualized, and if it's not there'south something wrong with the IEP.

3. Mr. Anaya wants to be certain Sienna's IEP contains challenging and meaningful learning goals that will guide her teachers' instruction. Is this a procedural error?

Correct! The IEP should be thought of as a tool, rather than every bit merely a document to be developed and filed away. In one case an IEP is adult, teachers must use information technology to guide their pedagogy and then that the student can run across her annual goals.

4. Mrs. Esposito will be Sienna's special education teacher, but Mr. Anaya will be the special instruction instructor who attends the IEP meeting. Is this a procedural error?

Correct!

Select the blazon of procedural error:

Correct! The general education and special education teachers are included on the IEP team because they have knowledge of the student, her strengths, and her areas of need. The general education instructor has expertise in the grade-level curriculum and tin speak to the student'due south performance in the general pedagogy classroom. The special education teacher has expertise in individualizing teaching and will exist responsible for implementing and/or overseeing the services and supports needed to help the student accomplish her goals. In this scenario, still, the initial IEP team coming together has not even so taken identify, and the special education services take non been identified. However, if Mrs. Pederson thinks that Mrs. Esposito will be Sienna's instructor, procedural error though it may be, then Mrs. Esposito should be the special education teacher at the IEP meeting. If scheduling conflicts are an consequence, arrangements should be fabricated to back up her omnipresence. For example, if Mr. Anaya is gratis during the IEP meeting time menstruum, rather than request him to nourish the IEP meeting, he could instead embrace Mrs. Esposito'due south form and then that she tin can nourish.

Incorrect. Attempt again.

Wrong. Try again.

5. Mrs. Pederson intends to share the pre-written IEP with Sienna's parents and ask them to sign it. Is this a procedural error?

Correct!

Select the type of procedural mistake:

Incorrect. Try over again.

Right! Parents must be actively involved in all aspects of the IEP development. Drafts of some IEP components tin be developed prior to the meeting, just all IEP team members must sympathize that they are only that—drafts—and feel comfy discussing it and making changes accordingly. A related business organization in the Challenge scenario is that only 45 minutes were allotted for the IEP meeting. A short IEP coming together in itself does not necessarily constitute a procedural error. However, 45 minutes is non plenty time to review and talk over the initial evaluation results with Sienna's parents and develop an IEP based on that data. The IEP team members—which include the parents—must identify her needs, decide on her annual goals, and determine the necessary services and supports that she needs to achieve those goals. As a result, Mrs. Pederson's intent to accomplish everything within the short timeframe, and the actions that she took to practice then, denies the parents their guaranteed correct to full interest in the IEP evolution.

Wrong. Try again.

IEP toolbox

This toolbox describes additional resources related to the information presented on this folio. These resources are provided for informational purposes only for those who wish to acquire more nearly the topic(s). It is not necessary for those working through this module to read or refer to all of these additional resources to understand the content.

IEP Team Members

This handout, also included on folio 3, lists the members of the IEP team and their roles in the IEP process. The listing includes those members whose participation is stipulated past IDEA and those whose role is determined by the individual needs of the educatee.

IEP Implementation: School Personnel Responsibilities

This form can be used by each team fellow member during an IEP meeting to record a educatee'southward IEP goals and the services and supports needed for the student to attain those goals. Post-obit the meeting, they can use it to assist them sympathise their responsibilities to ensure the IEP is implemented as intended.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email