ED Benefit Educational Benefit Purpose To determine if the students Individualized Education Program IEP was reasonably calculated for the student to receive educational benefit over three consecutive years ID: 728401
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Educational Benefit Review" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Educational Benefit Review(ED Benefit)Slide2
Educational Benefit
PurposeTo determine if the student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) was reasonably calculated for the student to receive educational benefit over three consecutive years.
Overview
There are four broad steps in the educational benefit review process
Chart the IEP information within each year about the student’s needs, present levels of performance, goals, programming, services, supports and progress
Analyze each IEP to determine if information about the student’s needs, present levels of performance, goals, programming, services, supports and progress are complete and interrelated/aligned.
Compare the analysis of each year’s IEP in order to determine if decisions made were based on progress or lack of progress
Assess educational benefit based on the information gathered, analyzed and compared within and across IEP’s reviewedSlide3
When is Ed Benefit Review Used?When Used:
Review of Educational Environments issuesGeneral Supervision Monitoring (GSM)Specific areas of need e.g. quality of IEPs, staffing concerns, program availability, scheduling and administrative decision makingSlide4
ED Benefit: Preparation Activities
A student sample is pre-selected based on decisions made by the District Team in accordance with sample selection procedures.A team of 4-5 individuals is selected to conduct the review including the following:
Facilitator
S.E. Teacher (not the student’s teacher)
G.E. Teacher (not the student’s teacher)
Person familiar with programs/services student receives (Bldg. Principal, Dept. Chair)
Other appropriate individuals (S.E. provider, S.E. administrator, Counselor)
The teacher who developed the current IEP and the student’s parent
should not be included on the team.The facilitator should provide the team with a description of the process and it’s purpose in advance of the meeting along with date, time and location for the meeting.The facilitator gathers the educational information needed to conduct the review on each selected student.Slide5
ED Benefit: Preparation Activities
Materials neededEBR Chart Colored markers: Black, Red, Green, BlueIEPs: 3 consecutive school yearsMET Report(s)Progress reports associated to IEPs
Student grades
Plan on at least 2 hours for processSlide6
ED Benefit: Charting the Information
The facilitator collects information verbally from the team members and charts the information on a large wall chart. The following information is charted:Students needs, including needs related to participation in general education and post secondary outcomes as well as disability specific needsTransition activities
Goals and objectives
Programs, services, supplementary
aids/services and program modifications
Progress
The facilitator collects information and charts all of the IEP’s that occurred during the three-year period.Slide7
Educational Benefit
PLAAFP
Transition
Goals/Objective
Program/Services
Progress
Preferences
& Interests
Curriculum
Disability Needs
Sup Services/Accom.Slide8Slide9
ED Benefit: Analyzing the Relationships
The facilitator queries the team to examine the relationships between information charted for each IEP. Information that is connected will be circled and a line drawn between the information. Unconnected information is noted with a question mark and needs further discussion.
Relationships between the following are analyzed:
Needs to transition activities and goals/objectives
Transition activities to goals
Programs, services, supplementary aids/services and program modifications to transition activities and goals/objectives
Supplementary aids/services to needsSlide10Slide11
ED Benefit: Comparing Relationships
The facilitator queries the team to determine the relationships between information across three years.The purpose of the year to year comparison is to establish if the following increased, decreased or stayed the same:
Student’s level of performance
Student’s transition activities
Student’s goals/objectives
Student’s programs, services, and/or supplementary aids and servicesSlide12
ED Benefit: Completing the Individual Student Summary
The team completes the summary form which involves transposing information from the wall charts to the form.The team answers a series of questions that address the following:Was a need identified in the assessment column?Was a goal or transition activity written in that area of need?
Was there a program, service, supplementary aid for that area of need?
Was progress reported in that area of need?Slide13
ED Benefit: Conclusion
Answering the Educational Benefit Review QuestionsUsing the wall charts and Student Summary form, the team answers another series of questions to determine if the student’s IEP’s were reasonably calculated to receive educational benefit.Slide14
ED Benefit Questions: #1
1. Are the assessments complete and do they identify all of the student’s needs (including, for secondary students, postsecondary outcomes and/or career assessment/functional vocational evaluation)? Slide15
ED Benefit Questions: #2
2. In Year 3, does the individualized education program (IEP), through the present level of academic achievement and functional performance (PLAAFP) statement or other IEP information, identify all of the student’s significant needs? Slide16
ED Benefit Questions: #3
3. In Year 3, are all of the student’s needs, including, for secondary students, postsecondary outcomes, preferences, and interests, addressed by goals and objectives, transition services, and/or supplementary aids and services? Slide17
ED Benefit Questions: #4
4. In Year 3, are there programs and services to support all of the student’s goals and objectives? Slide18
ED Benefit Questions: #5
5. Do the transition services provided for the student over the three-year period of review represent a coordinated set of activities related to the student’s vision for adult life? Slide19
ED Benefit Questions: #6
6. In reviewing the comparison of the PLAAFP from Year 1 to Year 2 and from Year 2 to Year 3, if the student did not make progress, were the goals and objectives, transition activities, or programs and services in Year 3 changed in the IEP to facilitate the student’s future progress? Slide20
ED Benefit Questions: #7
7. In reviewing the comparison of the PLAAFP from Year 1 to Year 2 and from Year 2 to Year 3, if the student did make progress, were the goals and objectives, transition activities, or programs and services in Year 3 changed in the IEP to facilitate the student’s future progress, including participation in general education? Slide21
ED Benefit Questions: #8
8. Were sufficient services provided to ensure that the student would make progress? Slide22
ED Benefit Questions: #9
9. Was this student with a disability provided with programs and services only to the extent necessary to address his/her needs? Slide23
ED Benefit Questions: #10
10. To assess for overall compliance: Considering the answers to each of the questions above, was the IEP reasonably calculated to result in educational benefit? Slide24
Case Law Connection
Burilovich v. Board of Ed of the Lincoln Consolidated Schools (Reference Notebook A 4C-1)6th Circuit (Decided and Filed – April 4, 2000)Summary judgment held that:Parents were not denied meaningful participation in the decision-making process
District staff adequately consulted with knowledgeable professionals
IEP adequately took into consideration autistic student’s unique needs and was designed to allow student to attain his maximum potential
Court did assess whether the IEP was developed through IDEA’s procedures (“
Board of Educ. v. Rowley
”) and was reasonably calculated for the child to receive educational benefits
See
id. at 2006-07, 102 S.Ct. 3034Michigan has added to this standard by requiring that an IEP be designed to develop the “maximum potential” of a child. Mich. Comp. Laws. Ann. §§ 380.170(a), 380.170(a), 380.1711(17)(a), 380.1751(1) (West 1997)