1. Proposed Revision to Speech/Language Eligibility Criteria
Beth McKerlie, CCC-SLP
Pat Jones, CCC-SLP
MSHA President-Elect
MSHA VP for School Services, Liberty Schools
NKC Schools
Dr. Diane Cordry Golden
Sharon Sowder, CCC-SLP
Policy Coordinator
MSHA President
MO-CASE

2. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
Only one of two states w “cognitive referencing”
Most all states use deficit model (1.75 to 2.0 SD)
In overall language, not discreet parts (e.g. syntax)
Workgroup of MSHA, MO-CASE, Higher Education, DESE and local district stakeholders established
Met summer and fall 2016 and developed recommendations to DESE
DESE to support training on proposal and with stakeholder support will include in 2017 State Plan

3. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
A language impairment is present when a comprehensive communication assessment documents all of the following (4 items):
1. The language impairment adversely affects the child’s educational performance as documented by lack of response to evidence based interventions designed to support progress in the general education curriculum.
Intent is to ensure RTI, MTSS type general education interventions have been implemented before consideration for IDEA eligibility.

4. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
2. The child’s overall language functioning is significantly below age expectations as measured by two or more composite standard scores on norm- referenced language assessments. The composite language score reflects both receptive and expressive language function in a single standard score. Significantly below is defined as 1.75 standard deviations below the mean for children who are kindergarten age eligible and older. Young child with a developmental disability criteria (communication area) shall be used for eligibility determinations for children who are 3 to 5 years of age but not yet kindergarten eligible.

5. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
New straight deficit of 1.75 SD below the mean replaces cognitive reference metric for K-12 students
Requires 2 overall language composite scores below the new criterion. Overall scores include both global receptive and expressive language – NOT scores in discreet areas (e.g. semantics or syntax).
Use Young Child with a Developmental Disability (YCDD) eligibility criteria for children aged 3-5 (not yet K eligible).

6. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
3. The child consistently displays inappropriate or inadequate language that impairs communication in the child’s educational environment as documented by structured qualitative procedures such as a formal a language sample, classroom observations, curriculum based assessments, teacher/parent checklists/interviews or other clinical tasks. Intent is to have authentic assessment beyond normed referenced scores that documents language impairment that adversely impacts educational performance in the school environment.

7. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
4. The language deficit is not primarily the result of any of the following:
Limited language experience or lack of instruction in language/English
Unfamiliarity with English, second language influence or dialectical differences
Environmental or economic disadvantage or cultural factors
Vision, hearing or motor disability
Intellectual disability or emotional disturbance
Intent to align with other eligibility criteria that ensure appropriate exclusions.

8. Language Impaired Eligibility Criteria
“Professional Judgement” has been eliminated. Replaced with “variance” allowance --
Note: Districts may adopt written procedures for utilization of reasonable variances that enable a student to meet the standard score criterion in A.2) above. For example a district could establish a procedure to accept a second composite score that is within one or two points of meeting the criterion when the criterion is met on a first composite score and no additional composite assessments are available or appropriate for the student.

9. Sound System Disorder Eligibility Criteria
A Sound System Disorder, which includes articulation and/or phonology, is present when:
1) the sound system disorder adversely affects the child’s educational performance as documented by lack of response to evidence based interventions designed to support progress in the general education curriculum,
Intent is to ensure general education interventions have been implemented before consideration for IDEA eligibility.

10. Sound System Disorder Eligibility Criteria
2) the student exhibits a significant delay of at least one year in correct sound production based on state designated normative data. The child’s sound system is significantly delayed based on a single word test and/or a sentence/phrase repetition task and a connected speech sample with consideration given to the type of error recorded (substitutions, omissions, distortions, and/or additions). These errors may be described as single sound errors or errors in phonological patterns.

11. Sound System Disorder Eligibility Criteria
3) the sound system disorder is not a result of dialectal differences or second language influence. Criteria moved to one year beyond norms plus required lack of response to intervention via non-special education services to ensure student requires “special instruction”.

12. Sound System Disorder Eligibility Criteria
“Professional Judgement” has been eliminated. Replaced with “variance” allowance --
Note: Districts may adopt written procedures to document the existence of a Sound System Disorder due to multiple errors in the sound system which are collectively so severe that the child's speech is virtually unintelligible even though the sound errors do not meet the criterion in B.2) above.

13. Voice Disorder
A voice impairment is present when a comprehensive communication assessment documents all of the following (4 items): 1) the voice disorder adversely affects the child’s educational performance as documented by lack of response to evidence based interventions designed to support progress in the general education curriculum, 2) the child consistently exhibits deviations in one or more of the parameters of voice: pitch, quality, or volume;

14. Voice Disorder
3) the child's voice is discrepant from the norm as related to his/her age, sex, and culture and is distracting to the listener;  
4) the voice impairment is not the result of --
a medical condition that contraindicates voice therapy intervention;
a temporary condition such as: normal voice changes, allergies, colds, or other such conditions; or
a dialectal difference or second language influence.
Intent for schools to establish policy to address medical clearance for voice therapy.

15. Fluency Disorder
A fluency impairment is present when a comprehensive assessment documents all of the following (3 items):  
1) the Fluency Disorder adversely affects the child’s educational performance as documented by lack of response to evidence based interventions designed to support progress in the general education curriculum,
2) the child consistently exhibits one or more of the following symptomatic behaviors of dysfluency such as:
* avoidance; * blockages; or
* sound, syllabic, or word repetition; * hesitations;
* prolongations of sounds, syllables, or words;

16. Fluency Disorder
3) the child’s fluency is significantly below the norm as measured by speech sampling in a variety of contexts and impairs communication in the child’s educational environment as documented by structured qualitative procedures such as classroom observations, curriculum based assessments, teacher/parent checklists/interviews, or other clinical tasks. Intent is to have authentic assessment beyond any numeric data that documents language impairment that adversely impacts educational performance in the school environment.

17. YCDD
As allowed under 34 CFR implementing IDEA, the State of Missouri also defines a child with a disability to include children ages three (3) through seven (7) five (5) who have been properly identified as a young child with a developmental delay. Children kindergarten age eligible through age seven (7) may continue eligibility as a Young Child with a Developmental Delay if they were identified as such prior to attaining kindergarten age eligibility until they are reevaluated.

18. Data Based Analysis
Several large districts participating on work group, comprised of 23 people
Representative of DESE, MO-CASE, MASP, schools based SLPs, and MSHA
Applied new criteria to 1200 evaluations wondering if flood gates would open
Result: not significantly different in number of students eligible, shift in type

19. Guidelines for Assessment Tools
Team approach
Purpose of assessment
Sensitivity and specificity
.80 or greater
Norms/severity for each assessment varies

20. Handbook
MSHA will lead the production of guidance handbook in collaboration with DESE, MO-CASE, higher education, school based SLPs, MASP and work group members
Educational impact – checklists, interview forms, observation forms
Cultural and linguistic diversity
Dysphagia

21. Timeline Presentations Draft Handbook
Fall 2017 Proposed State Plan revisions
Public comment period
Early 2018 final published State Plan
July 2018 new State Plan effective date

22. Questions
Contact for questions: Diane Cordry Golden Beth McKerlie Pat Jones