IDEA 2004 News: Testimony by Pete Wright at Public Hearing on IDEA 2004 Regulations (July 12, 2005)

Print this page

[Note: Pete Wright provided this testimony on the proposed IDEA 2004 regulations at the Public Hearing in Washington, DC on July 12, 2005. Read Pete's description of the hearings.]

My name is Pete Wright and I'm from Deltaville Virginia. You hit a home run with the fast track, the re-organization of the regs, and the incredible attentiveness and interest you have shown this evening, hour after hour. Sadly, to the disappointment of many parents, the United States struck out with the brief filed in Schaffer v. Weast.

I'm going to talk about the 60-day eligibility window in proposed regulation 300.301(c), but first some background.

I have been involved with disability issues since 1950 when Washington, D.C. public school staff told my parents I was borderline retarded and emotionally disturbed.

I am an attorney and have represented children with disabilities since 1978.

As an attorney, I have had seven special education cases before the U. S. Courts of Appeal in the Fourth and Sixth Circuits, and won five. In the two I lost, I came into the cases late, after the case was lost below.

I represented Shannon Carter before the U. S. Supreme Court where we prevailed against the Florence County South Carolina school district in a 9-0 decision in 34 days.

My wife and I are the co-authors of four books about special education and No Child Left Behind. We maintain the wrightslaw website. Next week, I will provide you with my written comments about proposed changes to the regulations.

Proposed regulation 300.301(c) should be changed to read: "The initial evaluation and determination whether a child is a child with a disability must be conducted within sixty calendar days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation, or, if the state establishes a shorter timeframe within which the evaluation must be conducted, within that timeframe."

The United States Code at 1414(a)(1)(C) reads that "Such initial evaluation shall consist of procedures to determine whether a child is a child with a disability within sixty days of receiving parental consent for the evaluation, or, if the state establishes a timeframe for such evaluation, within such timeframe."

Your proposed regulation states that "The initial evaluation must be conducted within sixty days of receiving parental consent." What is critical is that the determination of eligibility must be made within sixty days.

The proposed regulation conflicts with and is inconsistent with the United States Code which states that both the initial evaluation and the determination of eligibility must be conducted within sixty days. In many jurisdictions, the mere completion of an evaluation is not the same as determination of eligibility.

I also recommend that you insert the phrase "calendar days" since this is already clear in proposed regulation 300.11 and Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Too often school district staff assume that the word "days" when in a regulation, automatically means either "school days" or "business days."

I also recommend that the language, "or, if the state establishes a timeframe for such evaluation, within such timeframe," be modified to read "or, if the state establishes a shorter timeframe for such evaluation, within such timeframe."

In the congressional discussions, it was clear that the purpose of this sixty day eligibility window was to correct the problems encountered by homeless and migrant children where the eligibility process is drawn out over many months. With those delays, the child is lost.

The Virginia special education regulations provide a 65 "business day" timeline for determination of eligibility, in other words, ninety-one calendar days. I understand that Virginia and many other states are intending to use the exception clause to extend the eligibility timeline far beyond the sixty calendar day window envisioned by Congress.

In 27 years of special education practice, I have regularly seen school districts complete the evaluation process at the end of three months, only to explain that the determination of eligibility will be delayed because, even though your son is in the eighth grade and reading at the 4th grade level and has an average IQ, we are not sure if the primary disability is a learning disability or if he has emotional problems. We are going to delay eligibility until we can have projective personality testing and perhaps a psychiatric consultation.

Six months later what happens, the child has dropped out of school or been expelled.

That was not the intent of Congress. The language in the proposed regulation needs to be changed."

END OF REMARKS BY PETE WRIGHT

To top

Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004

E-book ($9.95)

Print ($14.95)

E-book & Print Combo
($19.95)

Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004 (ISBN: 1-892320-05-3) by Peter Wright and Pamela Darr Wright includes the full text of Parts A and B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA 2004) with commentary, cross-references, strategies, and resources. The book includes several appendices, a glossary of acronyms, abbreviations and terms, and a bibliography of resources.

Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004 is designed to meet the needs of parents, teachers, advocates, attorneys, related services providers, administrators, teachers of special education, school psychology, and education law courses, hearing officers, and employees of district and state departments of education.

Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004 is available as a print book, an e-book - or both.

Print publication (168 pages, 8 1/2" x 11", perfect bound, $14.95 plus shipping). Ship date: 2nd week of August.

E-book (162 pages, 8 1/2" x 11", $9.95). Available now. When you purchase the e-book (PDF format), you can download it within minutes. You can read it on your computer or print it out on your printer. There is no shipping or sales tax on e-books. Learn more about e-books.

E-book & Print Combo: Receive Wrightslaw: IDEA 2004 as an e-book immediately and the print edition in August ($19.95 plus shipping)

A Note About Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition
We expect to publish Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition after the U. S. Department of Education issues the final special special education regulations and the U. S. Supreme Court issues a decision in Schaffer v. Weast. We do not expect these events to occur before January or February 2006.


COVID-19 Law Advocacy Topics A-Z Training Wrights' Blog Wrightslaw Store Yellow Pages for Kids