During last week of April, Congress was contacted by over 14,000 parents, voicing their concerns over H.R. Bill 1350.  In spite of parent's concerns, Congress approved this legislation and it will now proceed to the Senate for vote.  According to Senator Carl Levin's office, it will probably be a few months before it comes to a vote in the Senate and the opportunities for input by parents and other members of the special needs community will be considerably greater.  For information about H.R. Bill 1350, please read below. 

Who does this legislation effect? 

Currently, over 6.5 million children receive services under IDEA.   As there are currently about 46.5 million children in the public schools in the U.S. in grades K-12, this legislation effects approximately 1 in 7 students.  According to the U.S. Census in 2000, the average number of children was 1.87 in U.S. households with children the under the age of 18.  This means that approximately 1 in 4 U.S. families with children under the age of 18 will be effected by changes in this legislation!  Additionally, with the estimated incidence of autism in the U.S. ranging from 1 in 250 to 1 in 500 people, the number of autistic children and adults in this country is estimated to be anywhere from 560,000 to over one million people.

These are rather alarming statistics in and of themselves - which might cause one to wonder why there is such a high incidence of disabilities in the U.S., but it drives home the importance of providing a good education for children with disabilities.  The long-term impact and cost to society of supporting children with disabilities throughout their lives directly ties to the quality of education and support they receive during their early, formative years to help them reach their fullest potential and become contributing members of society.    

What changes are being proposed to IDEA? 

Some of the damaging provisions include:

-  Reduces the obligation of schools to meet the needs of children with disabilities.  This bill eliminates short-term objectives, allowing optional multi-year IEPs.  It requires that testing accommodations be "appropriate” and limits the participation of general education teachers in the IEP process. This would severely  undermine parental involvement and takes away special needs children’s ability to fully participate in the general curriculum.

-  Allows public schools to deny education to special needs children.  Allows schools to expel any child with a  disability whom the school determines has violated a school’s "code of conduct" without being accountable to the parents. This is regardless of how severely the child is impaired, taking away protections currently in place, including "manifestation determination" review process, eliminating the requirement for functional behavioral assessments and positive behavioral interventions in discipline cases. The changes will subject children with disabilities to exclusionary disciplinary policies likely to punish them for both behavior due to their disabilities and for behavior in reaction to the harassment and bullying they are often subjected to by others.

-  Takes away accountability of states to meet the needs of children with disabilities.  This legislation reduces state’s accountability to help special needs children.   Allows states to “reasonably demonstrate” rather than “demonstrate to the satisfaction of” the U.S. Secretary of Education that they are in full  compliance with federal law. This change would weaken greatly federal oversight and accountability of states in meeting federal standards for the education of special needs children.

- Allows schools to use federal money in their district provided for special needs kids for non-IDEA, non-special needs purposes.  It does not mandate full-funding of IDEA.  In addition, it would allow the federal funds to be diverted from non-IDEA purposes, reducing the amount of money available to help children with disabilities.  It also allows state and federal money to be combined, losing any accountability for how special education money is spent.  

- Impairs and compromises funding for educational research.   Moves Special Education Research, Studies and Evaluations to the  Institute of Education Sciences.  This action compromises the coordination of  these activities with those conducted by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), such as monitoring and technical assistance, and eliminating the requirement that the Secretary consult with stakeholders in  the field with regard to the development of a Comprehensive Plan for activities.

- Takes away the rights of parents to take legal action against schools and receive damages.  Limits parents’ ability to take legal actions relating to the identification, evaluation, or education of their  child by imposing a one year statute of limitations on such actions.  This means imposing a one year statute of limitations even if school districts ignored the “child find” requirement, even if IEPs and placements were inappropriate  for years, and even if parents never received notice or were otherwise  unaware of their rights.  It also allows state governors to “cap” the fees that would  be available to parents’ attorneys.  Such changes would unfairly restrict parents’ rights while making it more difficult to obtain legal help.

- Prohibits advocates from helping parents in the schools. This legislation contained a provision to prohibit all advocacy, whether publicly or  privately funded, of certain nonprofits.  The watchdog group, OMB Watch, reported in a March 26 email that the provision prohibits "federal  relations" which OMB Watch reasons covers every conceivable type of  government interaction of non-profits, including advocates attending IEP  meetings.  After several days of organized protest from nonprofits, OMB  Watch reported in a March 31 update that the nonprofit anti-advocacy provision was to be dropped from the bill.  The fear is that this provision  will be attached later, or on some other legislation.  So, along with the other items in the legislation, please comment on your appreciation that  this issue has been removed from the legislation, and your desire that it not be reinstated in this legislation or in any other.

In addition to these major reversals of the rights of parents and children in the special needs community there are also the following damaging provisions:

-     Parents are required to specify issues for hearings in their complaints or at  mandatory pre-due process hearing meetings.  It then prohibits parents from  raising issues at hearings that they had not previously specified at this  pre-hearing meeting, which they probably attended without an attorney,  because this legislation would also eliminate the possibility of attorney  fees being paid for pre-hearing meetings.

-     Prohibits hearings from even taking place until some unspecified SEA/LEA  employee determines that the hearing request was adequate.

-     Excuses school districts for failure to provide adequate notice by prohibiting hearing officers from deciding that FAPE was denied if notices  were not provided.

-     Provides for voluntary binding arbitration.  These means you have no chance to appeal.

-     Allows up to ten states to obtain waivers of unspecified  paperwork requirements - IEPs, notices, meeting notes – for as long as 4  years.  Do you know all your due process rights? Does every parent you know  know his or hers?  Just how are you going to find out about things like the  new one year statute of limitations and your other rights if notices are eliminated or abbreviated? 

- Loss of jobs for special service providers in public schools

This legislation also endangers the livelihood of public school professionals as those professionals who provide special needs services, such as speech and occupational therapy,  when districts are able to divert and reduce funding for special needs services.  

What can parents, teachers and other concerned citizens do?

Communicate your disapproval to your senators and pass this information along to others.

1. Personal stories are important. Explain how your child, student, or child you work with will be hurt by the proposed changes.

2. Explain why the bill may turn back the clock, harm children or lead to increased costs to society if children with disabilities don't get the  education they need to "prepare them for employment and independent living" (§1400(d) Purposes of IDEA statute)

3. Keep your letter short. Focus on one or two key points. Every member of the Senate gets hundreds of letters a day. Their staff do not have time to  wade through long letters.

4. Offer to follow-up with a phone call or visit.

5. Send your letter by fax or email.  

See what Congressman Miller had to say about this legislation: http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/rel4903.html

See what Congressman Jim McGovern had to say about this legislation:  http://www.house.gov/mcgovern/043003rule1350.htm

The National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems (NAPAS)  developed an Analysis of Proposed Changes to IDEA as a "side-by-side" table that compares the current IDEA with the proposed bill. Wrightslaw.com has converted this Analysis of Proposed Changes to IDEA into a pdf file for easy  printing and distribution.  http://www.wrightslaw.com/news/2003/idea.house.sidebyside.napas.pdf  

Another excellent summary of the legislation is available at the web site, Justice For All -  http://www.jfanow.org/cgi/getli.pl?1710

Download this Directory of Members of Congress for contact info, including  phone numbers.  http://www.wrightslaw.com/news/2003/house.numbers.pdf.   

In Conclusion