Question:
My child has been found eligible for
special education services under the new Autism Spectrum Disorder
category (ASD - R 340.1758). Does not my child now have the right to
enroll in a public school for Autism? When I asked that he be enrolled
in an autism program I was told that since he was qualified for ASD
eligibility due to a medical diagnosis of PDD-NOS (Pervasive
Development Disorder – Not Otherwise Specified) he does not have
"autism" and therefore is not eligible for an autism program.
Answer:
As detailed in an earlier Ask
the Attorney article, last September the Michigan Department of
Education replaced the criteria it had used for years to determine a
student’s eligibility for special education services due to autism
with a new and broader definition. As you note, the replacement
category is now titled Autism Spectrum Disorder. (See previous
article for exact qualifying definition). At the same time, the only
defined program for “students with autism” remains unchanged. That
program is defined in the Michigan Revised Administrative Rules for
Special Education as:
R 340.1758 Programs for students with
autism.
Rule 58. (1) Specific requirements for programs for students with
autism shall be provided using either of the following alternatives:
(a) Programs that consist of 1 classroom program for
students with autism shall not have more than 5 students and shall be
served by a teacher of students with autism. However, programs that
consist of more than 1 classroom may have more than 5 students in a
classroom, if the average student-to-teacher-and-aide ratio does not
exceed 5 students to 1 teacher and 1 aide. A classroom with 3 or more
students shall have 1 aide.
(b) A special education program described in the
intermediate school district plan set forth in R 340.1832(d) and
approved by the state board of education that assures the provision of
educational programming for students with autism.
Now, in direct response to your questions, there is no
“public school for autism”. Under Michigan’s implementation of IDEA,
each Intermediate School District (ISD) creates a plan that describes
how they will serve their population of IDEA eligible students,
including those with autism. Some ISDs elect to provide a program
that consists of one or more classrooms with a 5:1
student-teacher ratio with a teacher with an AI certification as
described in R 340.1758(a). Other ISDs elect to create their own
program and have it approved by the state board as is allowed by R
340.1758(b).
The actual classroom where the program
services are delivered may be located with the ISDs other center based
programs, or in a classroom leased from a local school district. Some
of the larger local districts for various reasons elect to support
their own “autism” program located in one or more of their local
schools and taught by their own certified teaching staff. The local
program will follow either the state rule or ISD plan.
As to matching eligibility labels to
programs, according to IDEA each student with a qualifying disability
shall be provided an “appropriate” program and placement that is
individualized that is appropriate to their needs. The match of
eligibility category and program under IDEA is not automatic.
For some students with autism, an appropriate program may well be one
as is described above. For others it could be something very
different. It could consist of a home and/or school based intensive
therapy program involving discrete trials, with the balance of the day
in a regular education setting to provide the student an opportunity
to reinforce the skills learned in the intensive program in a setting
with non-disabled peers. Yet for others it could be a regular
education classroom with a 1:1 paraprofessional or some other mix of
regular education and special education classrooms and services, with
or without full time paraprofessional support.
The simple answer is that one size may
not fit all. IDEA recognizes this by mandating that only the IEP
Team, which includes the student and parents, can make this decision.
Further, that these decisions can only be made in a meeting and after
consideration of all the alternative programs and placements. IDEA,
and the court opinions interpreting IDEA, also provides that not only
must the IEP Team must consider the entire range of programs available
(and modify the available ones if needed ) but they must start the
process considering the least restrictive environment (all or majority
of time in general education) to the more restrictive environments
(full time special education). If any administrator makes a
pre-determination that prevents the Team from “considering” any
particular program for any reason, including a medical diagnosis
PDD-NOS, in my opinion that act may well constitute a significant
violation of IDEA procedural rules and thereby deny the student a FAPE.
As stated in the earlier posting on
autism, a parent can request any program, any placement or any related
service they and the private experts they may have consulted see as
appropriate for their child. So yes, a parent can request, (always
in writing) a placement in the AI program that is offered by your
school district or ISD. In turn, the IEP Team must fairly consider
your request. If the IEP Team denies your request, they should (but
rarely do) provide you with a written statement explaining exactly why
your request was rejected. See 34 CFR §300.504 – Prior Written
Notice.
Just as when a parent disagrees with any
decision of the IEP Team, they have a limited number of choices: (1)
Agree with the IEP and allow it to be implemented. (2) Allow the
proposed IEP to be automatically implemented by taking no action,
which will happen no later than 15 school days after the parent is
provided a copy of the IEP with the signature of the district’s
superintendent (or designee) attached. (3) Request mediation, which
under current law the school district is not required to participate.
(4) Request a due process hearing, in which case the implementation
of the proposed IEP is stopped under the “stay put” provisions of
IDEA, unless the parties agree otherwise.
As due process can have a very fast time
line (45-days from request to decision), I strongly suggest that
before a parent formally requests a due process hearing they first
meet with an attorney or advocate who has experience in representing
parents in due process hearings and has some familiarity with the
issues involved with autistic students. Even if they do not retain
someone to represent them at the hearing, all the school districts I
know of have their highly skilled and experienced legal counsel
represent them at the hearing. I charge a fee for such a
consultation, which takes two to four hours, but not all attorneys may
do so. Michigan Protection and Advocacy Services (www.mpas.org)
does have professional advocates and a limited number of attorneys
available at no charge if you situation meets their accepting
criteria. There are also other agencies may be able to provide
services (see
www.bridges4kids.org).
John Brower, JD
Education Law Center, PLLC · 810-227-9850
·
www.michedlawcenter.com
Copyrighted Material - All Rights
Reserved - May Not Be Reproduced Without Written Permission |