Directions: Read The Brief Description Of The Procedural Ide

Directions Read The Brief Description Of The Idea Procedural Safeguar

Read the brief description of the IDEA procedural safeguard presented below. Then respond to the scenario presented after the description. IDEA Procedural Safeguard # 1 Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) Description: According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), all children are afforded the right to a free and appropriate public education. This means, that irrespective of a student's education needs, under the law (i.e., IDEA), they are afforded the right to access a free and appropriate public education. At times, the extent of a student's educational needs may extend outside of the range of educational services that their school district offers (e.g., students who may require a therapeutic day school placement but their school district may not have a therapeutic day school within the district).

In this case, the school district would still responsible for meeting the educational needs of the students even if the student required an educational placement outside of their home school district. Visit FAPE online at for more information regarding this procedural safeguard. Scenario: Michael has been referred for special education services after teachers and his parents had tried several problem-solving efforts within his current school and classroom to help meet his education needs. Results from Michael's full case study evaluation suggest that he possesses behaviors consist with an emotional disability and requires special education services for more than 50% of his school day in order to help meet his educational needs.

Michael's Individual Education Plan (IEP) team decides that he requires a therapeutic day placement in order to meet his educational needs. An administrator within Michael's home school district states that the school district does not offer a therapeutic day placement option for students and Michael must attend a placement outside of the county. This placement will cost over $5,000 per year, but the school has stated they can only pay $3,000 for an out of district therapeutic day placement. Based on what you have learned about FAPE, explain why or why not this is an acceptable solution for Michael.

Paper For Above instruction

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees that all students with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate public education (FAPE). This right ensures that students like Michael, who require specialized services beyond the typical school curriculum, receive tailored educational support to meet their unique needs. Under the provisions of IDEA, schools are mandated to provide or arrange appropriate education placements, even if they extend beyond the district or require additional funding, to ensure students' access to FAPE. The scenario involving Michael highlights critical issues related to this law and emphasizes the importance of adherence to the legal standards that protect students' educational rights.

FAPE is predicated on the principle that every child with a disability must have access to educational opportunities that are tailored to their individual needs, at no cost to the family (Yell, 2019). This includes providing special education services, related services, and appropriate placements that enable students to make meaningful educational progress. When a student's needs cannot be adequately met within the general education environment, IDEA mandates that schools must find or develop appropriate placements. The law stipulates that these placements must be based on an individualized education program (IEP), which is developed collaboratively by an IEP team composed of educators, parents, and specialists (Bateman & Herr, 2018).

In Michael's case, the IEP team has determined that he requires a therapeutic day placement to address behaviors associated with an emotional disability. Such placement is essential for his educational development and well-being. However, the administration's claim that the district does not offer this type of placement and that Michael must attend an out-of-district program raises the question: is the district fulfilling its obligation under FAPE? According to guidelines from the U.S. Department of Education (2017), if the district cannot provide a placement that meets the child's educational needs, it must arrange for him to be placed in an equivalent program elsewhere—regardless of cost—so long as it is appropriate for the student.

In this scenario, the district's willingness to pay only $3,000 out of an over $5,000 annual cost for an out-of-district placement is problematic. Under IDEA, the district is responsible for ensuring that Michael's placement is appropriate and meets his individual needs. Limiting the funding or insisting on a lower-cost placement, which may not fulfill the student's unique requirements, violates the core principle of FAPE. The law does not permit districts to deny or limit placement options based solely on cost considerations if a more suitable placement exists and is necessary for the child's educational success.

Thus, denying Michael access to a therapeutic day program that is deemed necessary by his IEP team solely based on financial constraints is not consistent with IDEA. School districts are legally obliged to provide or arrange for a placement that confers meaningful educational benefit. If the district cannot afford to pay the full cost, they are responsible for seeking alternative funding sources or state-funded programs that can ensure the placement is properly funded, as per the legal requirements (Schrag, 2019). Failing to do so would constitute a violation of Michael's rights under FAPE.

Further, IDEA emphasizes collaborative problem-solving and ensuring that placement decisions are driven by the student's needs, not merely budget limitations (Yell, 2019). The district has the legal obligation to explore all viable options that can support Michael's educational development effectively. This may include seeking grants or state funds, collaborating with other agencies, or reallocating resources to meet such essential needs.

In conclusion, the district's stance that it cannot provide the required therapeutic placement due to financial constraints is inconsistent with IDEA’s provisions on FAPE. The law mandates that any placement necessary for a child's educational success must be provided or arranged, regardless of the district's current budget restrictions. The district must fulfill its obligation by ensuring that Michael receives the appropriate services and placement outlined in his IEP. Failure to do so not only deprives Michael of his rights to a free and appropriate public education but also potentially exposes the district to legal consequences for non-compliance with federal special education law.

References

  • Bateman, B., & Herr, J. (2018). >Special Education: Practices, Procedures, and Principles. Routledge.
  • Schrag, R. (2019). The Law and Special Education: Myths and Realities. Routledge.
  • U.S. Department of Education. (2017). A Guide to the Individualized Education Program. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
  • Yell, M. (2019). The Law and Special Education (4th ed.). Pearson.
  • Bateman, B. D., & Herr, J. (2018). Practice Principles in Special Education. Pearson.
  • Fletcher, P. D., & Zimmer, J. (2020). Ensuring Equity in Special Education Law. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 33(2), 70-80.
  • Snell, M. E., & Brown, F. (2019). Instruction of Students with Special Needs. Pearson.
  • McLaughlin, T. F., & Voorhis, P. (2019). Managing Special Education Programs. Corwin Press.
  • Individual with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004).
  • Office of Special Education Programs. (2016). A Parent's Guide to the IEP. U.S. Department of Education.

Related Assignments