This is the last piece of a four-part blog series on How to Complete a Comprehensive Special Education Evaluation. 

Part One Covered -- Why We Need a Comprehensive Evaluation 

Part Two Covered -- Planning a Comprehensive Evaluation

Part Three Cover -- Everything about Parent Input

The last couple of pieces mean making sure you have all the data you need and of course consent.

If you are assessing a Second Language Learner (multi-lingual), ensure those administering assessments are appropriate and you are following your state and district guidelines to make sure the evaluation is needed. This means you are suspecting a disability but it could be a difference and not a disability. Otherwise, you may find you have data you can’t use which may affect the reliability and validity of assessment results. 

IDEA contains specific provisions related to the assessment of students who speak a second language. These provisions ensure that evaluations are fair and non-discriminatory. Key sections include:

• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(b)(3) - Evaluation Procedures:
• This section mandates that assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child must be selected and administered so as not to be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis. It also specifies that these materials should be provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c) - Evaluation Procedures:
• This regulation elaborates on the requirements for evaluations. It states that:
• Assessments and other evaluation materials must not be discriminatory on a racial or cultural basis (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(1)(i)).
• They must be provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication, and in the form most likely to yield accurate information on what the child knows and can do academically, developmentally, and functionally, unless it is clearly not feasible to provide or administer (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(1)(ii)).
• The child must be assessed in all areas related to the suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social and emotional status, general intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(4)).
• Assessments must be technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors (34 C.F.R. § 300.304(c)(7)).
• 20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(6)(B) - State Eligibility:
• This section requires states to ensure that children with disabilities are assessed using materials and procedures that are not racially or culturally discriminatory and that are provided and administered in the child's native language or other mode of communication unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.

These provisions collectively ensure that evaluations of students who speak a second language are conducted fairly and yield accurate, useful information about the student's abilities and needs. They emphasize the importance of using appropriate, culturally and linguistically responsive assessment methods. This is what IDEA states what WE HAVE to do but check your state regulations as they will be way more specific about what YOU HAVE to do.

What are my timelines?

Assign someone to set timelines when the individual assessment reports are due to ensure parents have a copy the week before the meeting to determine eligibility and to evaluation timelines will be met. 

Why? Well outside of everything else you have to do, those timelines are important. If a student is already behind, why would you want to make it worse by messing up your dates? Plus, from an advocacy standpoint, it will get you in trouble if they are missed. 

IDEA’s specific provisions that outline the timelines for conducting assessments and evaluations of students who may have disabilities. These timelines are designed to ensure that evaluations are conducted in a timely manner so that appropriate services can be provided without unnecessary delays. The relevant sections of IDEA include:

• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)(1)(C) - Initial Evaluations:
• This section states that the initial evaluation must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation, or within the timeframe established by the state if the state has established its own timeline.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.301(c) - Initial Evaluations:
• This regulation further specifies the timeline for initial evaluations. It mandates that the initial evaluation must be conducted within 60 days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation
  unless the state has established a different timeframe. The evaluation must be sufficiently comprehensive to identify all of the child's special education and related services needs.
• 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)(2)(B) - Reevaluations:
• Reevaluations must be conducted if the public agency determines that the educational or related services needs of the child, including improved academic achievement and functional performance, warrant a reevaluation, or if the child's parents or teacher requests a reevaluation. However, a reevaluation may not occur more than once a year unless the parent and the public agency agree otherwise, and must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and the public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary.
• 34 C.F.R. § 300.303 - Reevaluations:
• This regulation provides further detail on reevaluation timelines, specifying that reevaluations must occur at least once every three years unless the parent and public agency agree that a reevaluation is unnecessary. Reevaluations may also occur more frequently if conditions warrant or if requested by the child's parent or teacher, but not more than once a year unless agreed upon by the parent and the public agency.

These provisions ensure that evaluations and reevaluations are conducted within specific timeframes to facilitate timely identification and provision of appropriate services for students with disabilities.

Once all the assessments are completed, send a draft home. No, it's not in IDEA but if parents are equal partners at the table sending home the report is treating them as such. And, no, it’s not predetermination. It’s making sure everyone has the same information. 

I also know that teams, builds, and district departments all have their own viewpoints and directions where this notion is concerned. 

Predetermination will get you and your team in trouble. Big trouble and it’s a very slippery slope. 

Predetermination in the context of IDEA refers to situations where decisions about a student's eligibility for special education services or the specifics of their Individualized Education Program (IEP) are made by the school district without appropriate input from the parents or before the IEP meeting occurs. Predetermination violates the collaborative intent of IDEA and can lead to a denial of a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).

While the term "predetermination" itself is not explicitly mentioned in IDEA, the regulations and case law provide guidance on what constitutes predetermination and why it is prohibited. Courts have consistently ruled that predetermination occurs when school personnel make unilateral decisions about a child's educational program without meaningful parental involvement. Some key cases include:

• Deal v. Hamilton County Board of Education (6th Cir. 2004): The court held that the school district violated IDEA by predetermining the child's placement and failing to consider the parents' input during the IEP process.
• W.G. v. Board of Trustees of Target Range School District (9th Cir. 1992): The court found that the school district violated IDEA by predetermining the child’s placement and not allowing the parents to meaningfully participate in the IEP process.

These provisions and cases collectively underscore the importance of parental involvement and prohibit predetermination by ensuring that all decisions about a child's special education program are made collaboratively, with meaningful input from the parents.

IEP Team Evaluation Meeting and Eligibility Determination

Before the meeting, identify the team meeting who will be the meeting facilitator. The facilitator should prepare for and coordinate the IEP team evaluation meeting to ensure all IEP team participants, including the parent, collectively participate in reviewing, analyzing, and interpreting assessment information and make required evaluation decisions: special education eligibility or continuing eligibility and identifying the educational needs of the student.

The IEP team reviews the developmentally and educationally relevant questions (from the evaluation plan) in relation to findings from existing and new assessments and other information gathered in prior steps.

Consider all information and make evaluation decisions:

• For students who are culturally or linguistically diverse, how are the assessment results indicative of a disability versus a difference?
• Do any exclusionary factors apply?
• Does the student meet or continue to meet disability category criteria (refer to disability category forms)?
• What are the effects of disability (e.g., how does the student’s disability affect access, engagement, and progress in age or grade-level general education curriculum, instruction, environments, or activities; under what conditions are these effects intensified or lessened)?
• What are the student’s disability-related needs, whether or not commonly linked to the student’s identified category(ies) of disability (e.g., areas in which the student needs to develop or improve skills that address effects of the student’s disability so the student can access, engage and make progress in general education)?
• Does the student need or continue to need specially designed instruction to address disability-related needs? Or can the student’s educational needs be addressed without specially designed instruction?

If the student is eligible for special education, ensure there is enough information to include in the evaluation report to support writing an IEP based on the eligibility decision and information about the student’s educational needs that can be used to develop or review and revise the student’s IEP. Evaluation information should help the team develop an IEP that supports access, engagement and progress to meet age and grade-level general education standards and expectations.

If the student is not, or is no longer, eligible for special education, ensure there is enough information to support the IEP team eligibility decision and to make recommendations about student needs that can be addressed with general education supports to help the student access, engage, and make progress in age or grade-level general education. The team may consider if the student is eligible for protection under section 504 because of a “physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities.” Remember Special Education and Section 504 are two different things and can’t be completed at a Special Education meeting. Following your building Section 504 procedures. 

Wrapping it all up

Document the IEP team evaluation decisions about eligibility and educational need on the evaluation report, including all required forms. Communicate and clarify next steps and any questions with the IEP team, including the parent (e.g., timelines for IEP development, plans to address student needs if student is not or no longer eligible for special education under IDEA).

If the student is eligible or continues to be eligible for special education: rewrite the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) based on the new data.

If the student is found not, or no longer eligible for special education, make general education recommendations as appropriate, such as supports other than special education services, within the LEA’s RTI/MTSS.

This by all means is not everything you need to know or even remember about making sure you are completing comprehensive special education evaluations–it was meant to provide a guide to help you remember what needs to be done and any sticky places that you need to be aware of. 

Those sticky places–those are things I look for as an advocate myself. You have a chance to take IEP compliance training either from your State or from an advocate like Catherine Whitcher, I would recommend it. I was surprised about what I didn’t know as a special education teacher or changes that didn’t get communicated such as Case Law or shifts in how you complete ML assessments.

If you have questions about anything from this series please reach out to me.

Chat soon-

PS: Introducing "A Guide to Special Education for Parents and Teachers," a comprehensive resource available in my Teachers Pay Teachers store. This guide provides valuable insights and practical strategies for navigating the special education process. Designed for both parents and educators, it covers essential topics such as the Individualized Education Program (IEP), legal rights, assessment procedures, and effective communication techniques. With clear explanations and actionable advice, this guide empowers stakeholders to collaborate effectively, ensuring that students with special needs receive the support and services they deserve. Ideal for those seeking to enhance their understanding and advocacy in the realm of special education.