Placement Decisions and Least Restrictive Environment Special Education Laws Made Simple November 2013 – Austin, Texas National Business Institute Presented by Sarah S. Flournoy, J.D., Ed.D. Of Counsel, West & Associates, LLP

FAPE Free and Appropriate Public Education Individuals with Disabilities Education Act – Qualify for federal funds – Constitutional right Not the same education for all students Definition intentionally flexible and broad

LRE, Mainstreaming and Inclusion With nondisabled peers to maximum extent Deviation if “nature or severity” of disability prevent education in general classroom Preference referred to as mainstreaming or inclusion

Continuum of Alternative Placements

Placement Decision Requirements Part of IEP Determined by ARD Committee Start at left and work to the right as necessary Little different for visually and auditory

Factors That Can and Cannot be Considered Consider – Potential harmful effect – Quality of services – Impact on attainment of goals Not Consider – Necessity of modifying general curriculum – Disability (as opposed to impact of disability)

Predetermining Placement Do not do! Usurps ARD committee Not individualized Parents prevented from participating

Private Schools Two scenarios – Parents voluntarily place there – LEA cannot provide services necessary to ensure FAPE LEA responsible for – Locating – Providing services to – tracking

Private Schools Two Part Test 1.School district’s placement pursuant to IEP inappropriate; and, 2.Private placement desired by parents appropriate. LEA FAPE does not need to exceed private school to be adequate

Change in Placement Procedures By ARD committee as part of IEP Parents may request ARD mtg to discuss 10 or more cumulative days TEA Methods to Resolve Disputes – TEA Investigation – Mediation – Due Process Hearing

Change in Placement Review of Placement Decisions & “Stay-Put” Reviewed – At least annually – Disciplinary issues may force earlier review Student “stay-put” while placement is being reviewed Gave rise to dangerousness exclusion – SC in 1988 No such exclusion where manifestation of disability 10 day cooling off period okay – 1997 Amendments to IDEA Only 3 reasons why student can be unilaterally moved

Questions? Sarah S. Flournoy, J.D., Ed.D. Of Counsel, West & Associates, LLP 320 South R. L. Thornton Frwy, Suite 300 Dallas, Texas