IDEA Complaint Decision 24-091

On July 10, 2024, the Department of Public Instruction (department) received a complaint under state and federal special education law from #### (complainant) against the #### (district). This is the department’s decision regarding that complaint. The issue identified is whether the district, during the 2023-24 school year properly conducted a special education evaluation.

The purpose of a special education evaluation is to determine whether the student is a student with a disability in need of specially designed instruction and the nature and extent of the student’s educational needs. Upon receipt of a referral, the district must appoint an individualized education program (IEP) team, and the IEP team must conduct a review of existing data to determine what additional data, if any, are needed to complete the evaluation. 34 CFR §§ 300.503(a)(1), 300.305(a); Wis. Stat. §§ 115.792(2), 115.782(2)(b). The IEP team must determine if the child is a student with a disability within 60 calendar days after receiving parental consent for additional assessments. Wis. Stat. § 115.78(3)(a). If the IEP team determines the student is a student with a disability, the district must hold an IEP team meeting to develop the IEP and determine placement within 30 calendar days of eligibility. Wis. Stat. § 115.78(3)(c).

 

On September 6, 2022, the district received a referral from the complainant to evaluate the student who is the subject of the complaint. On June 7, 2023, the complainant agreed to a timeline extension as a specific learning disability (SLD) was being considered for the first time, and the student needed to complete two scientific research-based interventions (SRBIs) under Wisconsin Administrative Rule PI 11.36.6.

 

When the 2023-24 school year began, the district had not completed the student’s evaluation. On September 9, 2023, the complainant reached out to the district to inquire why their child’s special education evaluation was not yet completed. District staff informed the complainant that during the previous school year, the student received some interventions, but they were not implemented with fidelity due to the staff member not being appropriately licensed.

 

The district began implementing the student’s first SRBI in math in October 2023. They completed the first intervention and moved onto the second intervention in mid-March 2024. By the end of the school year, the parent contacted the staff member delivering the interventions to inquire whether the evaluation was going to be completed before the end of the school year. The staff member stated that there was not enough progress monitoring data from the second SRBI to complete the evaluation. The staff member and parent made a plan to have the student complete the second intervention over the summer break.

 

On June 17, 2024, a district level special education administrator informed the staff member they could not complete the intervention during the summer. The special education administrator stated that internal district guidance required a student to receive universal instruction in the area of concern and the intervention simultaneously. Due to scheduling conflicts, the staff member was unable to provide universal instruction and the intervention during the summer break. Although it is district practice to provide interventions in this manner, there is nothing in the SLD administrative rule that would require a student to simultaneously receive universal instruction in order to complete an intervention. Interventions are meant to supplement, not supplant, universal instruction. Completing an intervention during summer break would be considered supplemental to universal instruction that takes place during the regular school year. By failing to complete the required SRBIs in a timely manner, the district failed to properly conduct a special education evaluation.

 

As corrective action, the district must complete a comprehensive special education evaluation of the student without further delay. The district must ensure sufficient current intervention data is collected to make a proper determination of the student’s eligibility under the area of SLD. Within 10 days of the eligibility determination, the district must submit a copy of the evaluation report to the department. If the student is determined to be eligible for special education, the IEP team must, as part of development of the student’s initial IEP, determine the amount of compensatory services to be provided to the student to rectify the significant delay in completing the evaluation. Within 10 days of the IEP team meeting, the district must submit a copy of the IEP including determination of compensatory services to the department. Additionally, within 30 days of the date of this decision the district is directed to develop and submit to the department for approval a corrective action plan to ensure special education evaluations are timely conducted and interventions are delivered timely and with fidelity, as needed to meet the requirements of SLD criteria.

All noncompliance identified above must be corrected as soon as possible but in no case, more than one year from the date of this decision. This concludes our review of this complaint. This decision is final for the IDEA State Complaint process. These issues may be addressed through other dispute resolutions, including mediation and due process hearings. For more information, visit the department’s website at http://dpi.wi.gov/sped/dispute-resolution or contact the special education team at (608) 266-1781.