So, DD12 was approved for an IEP today. There is a statement in the evaluation report that says:
In fact, I went to some trouble to be certain that the school counselor had a copy of her autism evaluation and diagnosis right when school started in September, and then sent it again before her October 2015 triennial review. The counselor didn't realize at the time that the review was actually a triennial, and apparently lost the diagnosis so it never went in DD's file. She backfilled on the triennial review thing in November, but never updated the file with the correct diagnosis. It came to light in March when DD was having issues at school, and the team decided then that the school psychologist should do an evaluation.

Do you guys think I should point this out or leave it alone? She is getting the IEP anyway, but I don't like the implication that we hid the ball on them when we were actually doing everything we could to be sure they had all the information.

Yes, I definitely think you should point it out in an easy-going kind of way.

Yes, definitely document.

The team is generally great, and it is a record-keeping issue. No one thought she needed a full eval back in October (either us or the counselor or the principal), but she has been having increasing issues during the school year that prompted the spring evaluation. I just don't like that it includes language that makes it look like we were the ones who delayed it, because we weren't. I wasn't sure if that was me putting my own ego ahead of DD's welfare, though.

We got the evaluation in May of 2015, and shared it with her elementary school that year before school got out, but it didn't make it over to the middle school where she is now. So I sent another copy in September when school started and talked to the counselor about it then. I should have brought up that the 504 meeting in October was her triennial, but it was our first triennial and I didn't know that they needed to do any more than they did. (I suppose I still don't really know that.) The counselor sent an updated report for us to sign when she realized that she should have done an evaluation, I think in January in November? The school psychologist didn't get involved until March.

Yes. You want dates documented accurately. As well as things are working now, there is no guarantee that this will continue, nor that the members of the team you now have will remain.

The outside eval should have triggered a reconvene, with the option of re-writing the IEP, but at least with documentation that the team reviewed it.

Huh. We've had two outside evaluations. The first triggered the initial evaluation that gave her the 504 plan (it diagnosed her with dysgraphia, ADHD, and SPD, but missed the autism). The second happened 2.5 years later, right at the end of the school year, and diagnosed her with autism (with the SPD and ADHD rolled in). We gave it to the elementary school, but it was not part of the file on her that was sent to the middle school. Then I gave it to the middle school, but they probably thought that whatever was supposed to have been done was done by the elementary school. They did re-evaluate her when the psychologist became aware of it (and gave her an IEP), but it didn't sound like it was an automatic thing.

If the school is made aware she has a disability (or suspects one) they are mandated to do an evaluation (see "Child Find Mandate"). So if they put the actual correct dates in the IEP documentation, it would be obvious that they are out of compliance, if they are just dealing w/ it now.

You'll notice that the team must meet at least annually to review, among other things, the results of any evaluative data.

http://www2.ed.gov/parents/needs/speced/iepguide/index.html

States have various regulations on how quickly the team must reconvene to consider the results of independent evaluations, whether obtained at parent expense, or as a district-paid IEE after an evaluation deemed unsatisfactory by the parents. (10 school days is not uncommon.)

And the real dates of their awareness of suspected disability are quite important, in the event that she needs disability protections from that period of time.

Just to add, that I don't know what the deal is w/ these schools, but I assumed all along that they had DS's outside neuropsych eval, and that it was transferred w/ the rest of his sp.ed records almost 1.5 years ago. The psychologist told me "Oh, we don't have that, normally all that is sent is the IEP and maybe the latest school eval" (????). I asked if that is a common practice, because how are parents supposed to know what info the school has then? No reply. A few days later the nurse called me because she needed to review records for the AT eval that DS is having, and I mentioned the neuropsych eval and the fact that the old school never sent it, apparently. She said "What, it's sitting right here in his records." I am completely mystified as to how the case manager and school psychologist insisted that the eval was not in the school anywhere (psych even said she would look in another place), and then the nurse said "What, it's right here." The eval had very important info that the school should have had, such as his IQ (!!!!) and other testing info that led to the IEP in the first place. Also, when he transferred schools, no one asked me any questions about him whatsoever. They were doing everything based on what was in the IEP from the old school, and that's pretty much it. Sometimes I wonder why I am even messing w/ an IEP because almost everyone proves to be incompetent.

So you are saying, that even something like my outside speech eval requires a team meeting? No one will answer my question as to why we are having a meeting, other than to say we need speech goals.

Unfortunately by the time the meeting happens, it will be about a month after I gave them the eval.

I just went back and looked at the 504 form that I filled out in November, and in the "other relevant information" section, I wrote, "The new diagnosis of autism probably warrants reexamining whether DD would benefit from an IEP, rather than a 504 plan. In particular, she would benefit from specialized instruction in social behavior and in appreciating the concerns and perspectives of others." I'm working on an email to the school psychologist with all of this now, but I have the dated emails and forms.

Good. Especially in the case of an ASD diagnosis, there may be overlap between behavior that is a manifestation of the child's disability, and behavior perceived by school authorities to be rule-breaking. It's important that she not be penalized for her disability.

(BTW, if that's your child's real name, you might want to remove it from your last post.)

Yes, I am. The outside speech eval may very well be the reason you are having this (rather belated) meeting, as supported by the mention of speech goals.

Oops! thank you aeh.

Since I am the world's worst advocate, anything I say should be taken with a grain of salt.

I think you should point it out so that the records are accurate. It sounds like you have a very supportive school, but if that ever changes--you might begin to have trouble remembering who said what/when/how and the document will help you keep your facts straight. What's the point in documenting inaccuracies?

Sadly, I don't think this really occurred to them except that they met with the special ed director, asking what they do if the parent won't sign the IEP. And then he told them they have to plan a meeting. Basically they already had a team meeting to review the IEE (without us) so now they need a fake meeting w/ us for the paperwork. Seems like everything around here is 30 days. Like 30 days after an eval is complete they have to write an IEP. So they are probably not concerned about it being a month.

I agree that I'd point out the error in documentation... I would write an email to the IEP team that is very specific about the dates that you communicated with the school over the past year.

Have you signed the IEP document yet? There should be a place in the document for parent comments, and I'd suggest adding your notes about when you gave the school documentation to the comments section too.

The one caveat I'd add - are you worried that this may cause ruffled feathers with the school team, and if so, are you happy up to this point with the school's actions? Was it difficult to get the IEP or not-so-difficult? If you are overall happy and for some reason didn't want to point this out or make an issue of it, I'd consider letting it slide - only because you perceive a low risk of getting into a legal tangle later on, and also because you do have your set of documentation (from the note you mentioned above sent to the school in November) showing that you'd made the school aware of the eval. You'll still always have that evidence if you need it.



I have a question that's really unrelated to the advice you'd requested so I apologize that it's a bit OT, but fwiw, I'm confused about something in general. You've mentioned your dd had a triennial review in October, but she was on a 504 plan, not an IEP. I thought (or at least the way it works in our state), students who qualify for IEPs have triennial reviews at which continuing eligibility for services is assessed. Students on IEPs also have an annual meeting to review progress toward goals and to update goals/accommodations as needed for the next school year. Students who have 504 plans have an annual meeting to update the 504 and/or determine if it needs to stay in place, but there is no triennial review for 504 students.

Is a triennial review for 504 students typical elsewhere?

polarbear

I'm elaborating a little because what pb said here made me remember something. At DS' 504 meeting in sixth grade (not the more recent one, to which I brought an advocate), there were several factually false statements made about what teachers had and had not been doing, and some things that were inaccurate about how the program functions. At the time, I didn't say anything because I didn't want to be petty, nor did I want to ruffle feathers, and didn't see it as terribly relevant. I was also, frankly, surprised and confused in the moment.

Not long after, I had a conversation with the counselor, who informed me that if I felt the meeting had been anything but supportive, then I had "cognitive distortions and needed counseling." I said that I wasn't sure how to perceive the meeting, because of misrepresentations that had not been corrected or clarified. The counselor told me it was dishonest of *me* to not say anything at the time. I still have no idea what she meant.

I had no idea I'd be tangling with his school for 504/IEP, didn't know his correct diagnosis yet, and didn't know he would struggle to the degree he has. We didn't have any of these problems at his previous school, where everyone had always been very supportive of DS and he did well.

I doubt very much you would be accused of being "dishonest" if you don't correct those points of fact, but you just never know when people are going to start acting...weird.

Aha! I think you have found the root of some confusion! Yes, in our school system, there is supposed to be a full evaluation (with testing) for 504 students every three years, to see if they still need the 504 plan. I am not sure whether that is federally mandated, state mandated, or just the policy of our school district.

We have not signed the IEP document yet, because it has not been written yet. This meeting was just to go over the eligibility determination for an IEP, at which it was determined that she does need one. Getting it was not terribly difficult once we got to the point of having an evaluation, at least not compared to some stories I've heard. I would like to stay on good terms with the team, especially considering that DD is in the first of seven planned years at this school. I did email the school psychologist (cc'ing the counselor and principal) about the date issue, putting it as one of a list of minor corrections, and I got back a brief email saying she would update the evaluation. The email was a little ambiguous about whether she will update the date part specifically or just the other stuff (the others really were picayune, like preeclampsia not eclampsia), but my inclination at this point is to let it slide. I feel like they have generally done their best to comply with the rules, and to do what's best for DD, so I don't want to get super picky about it. I think my email will be sufficient if we ever need to go back and argue about dates.

DD's grades are pretty low, mostly because of missed assignments during a bad spell this spring, and I was able to point that out during the meeting, too. I think no one had looked at her grades for this semester until I mentioned it, and the principal said something like, "This is a kid who should be getting all A's in her sleep," so they will pay attention to that now. I don't actually care about C's on her report card in sixth grade, but I will obviously care a lot more in ninth if she can't get it turned around by then.

Will she be allowed to take advanced/honors/gifted classes if she has Cs? I'm not worrying about DS' grades too much because I can't--but he won't be able to get into the IB program with Cs. I've known kids whose teachers refused to "approve" them for honors classes based on poor grades due to missing homework, when they clearly had the ability.

You want to hear something crazy? Her school district offers "Honors Language Arts" and SPED "Reading Lab." There are no non-honors courses. So I don't have to worry about them dropping her from honors.