The IDEA Amendments of 1997

Table of Contents

News Digest 26 (ND26)
1998
Approx. 54 pages when printed
PDF version



Introduction

After two years of analysis, hearings, discussions, and other legislative activities, both the Senate and the House of Representatives have passed legislation that reauthorizes and amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). President Clinton signed the bill into law on June 4, 1997. The reauthorized legislation is called the "Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997," and is Public Law 105-17.

This News Digest provides readers with an overview of the major changes to the IDEA, as well as a detailed, point-by-point look at the law, including verbatim language of portions of the law itself. Information is presented in a side-by-side analysis, with portions of the "old" IDEA's requirements presented on the left side of the page, and the "new" IDEA's requirements (and specific language) presented on the right. This presentation will allow readers to readily see some of the principle areas where the IDEA has changed and where it has remained essentially the same.

This document is intended for individuals who are already familiar with the previous IDEA and who want to know the specifics of IDEA 97. This includes state and local education agency personnel such as administrators and special education directors; Parent Training and Information (PTI) center staff and advocates; school personnel such as principals, special educators, and general educators; and other people who have a base of knowledge about this important legislation.




An Overview of the Changes

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 bring many changes to the law that was initially passed in 1975 as P.L. 94-142. That law, known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, or the EHA, has guaranteed since 1975 that eligible children and youth with disabilities would have available to them a free appropriate public education (FAPE) designed to meet their unique educational needs. P.L. 94-142 has been amended many times since its original enactment, each time after lengthy debate and consideration. This latest reauthorization includes many modifications to the law. Some of these changes are significant, while others subtly fine tune the processes already laid out for schools and parents to follow in planning and providing special education and related services to children and youth with disabilities.

What are some of the most significant changes to the IDEA? Basically, the changes fall into several areas that are critically important to the special education process. These include:

This overview looks at each of these issues briefly, then refers the reader to the side-by-side analysis of how the IDEA has been changed to address each issue. (A numbering system will be used to refer the reader to the appropriate place in the side-by-side. For example, the text might read, "See #15." Readers should look for the discussion in the side-by-side numbered "15.")

If you are interested in locating a specific issue or change, you may wish to refer to the Index at the end of this document.

Changes Not Covered in This Document

Space does not permit us to cover all the changes that reauthorization has brought to the IDEA. We have selected for discussion those modifications and new requirements that most directly affect how services are provided at the local level -- for instance, IEP changes, behavioral issues and discipline -- and those changes that, although made Statewide, affect families and the professionals who work with them -- such as mediation and assessment of children with disabilities.

Not discussed are changes to the law that are highly administrative in nature, such as state funding formulas, the state-local funding split, and school-based improvement plans. Plans are to make discussion of these changes available separately.

Including Children and Youth with Disabilities in Assessments

Whether or not students with disabilities should take part in assessments (testing) conducted across their State or district has been an area of controversy over the years. If these students are included, what type of modifications and accommodations, if any, should be made to ensure that their disabilities do not get in the way of their demonstrating what they know or can do?

IDEA 97 explicitly requires States to include children with disabilities, with accommodations when necessary, in State and districtwide assessment programs. For children who cannot participate in regular assessments, States must develop alternative assessments by 2000.

To read the verbatim language of the new IDEA regarding these requirements, see #19 in the side-by-side analysis.

Evaluating Children

The IDEA 97 amends the way in which children with disabilities are: (a) evaluated initially to determine whether or not they have a disability, and (b) reevaluated every three years to determine whether or not they continue to have a disability. This section highlights some of the changes made to both the initial evaluation process and the reevaluation process.

Initial evaluations

As previously required by law, before a school may provide special education and related services to a child for the first time, a full and individual initial evaluation of the child must be conducted. Also as before, parents must give their informed consent to this initial evaluation. The initial evaluation is conducted to determine:

The process by which schools answer these questions has changed under IDEA 97. The school begins, if appropriate, by reviewing existing evaluation data on the child, including evaluations and information provided by the parents, current classroom-based assessments and observations, and observations of teachers and related services providers. The group of individuals involved in this review is the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate. On the basis of that review, and input from the parents, the team identifies what additional data, if any, are needed to determine:

This latter aspect--identifying the additions or modifications the student needs to the special education and related services--may appear to apply exclusively to reevaluation of a student, as opposed to an initial evaluation. However, even as part of an initial evaluation, it will be important for the team to contemplate what additions or modifications the student will need to his or her special education and related services and look at the existing evaluation data to determine if, indeed, the team can identify this information.

If the team identifies additional data that are needed, the local educational agency (LEA) must then administer such tests and other evaluation materials as may be needed to produce the data identified by the team.

Generally, IDEA 97 maintains previous requirements with respect to the use of appropriate, sound, and nondiscriminatory evaluation practices (e.g., not using any single procedure as the sole criterion for determining whether a child has a disability or for determining the appropriate educational program for the child; using technically sound instruments; providing and administering tests and other evaluation materials in the child's native language or other mode of communication, unless it is clearly not feasible to do so). IDEA 97 adds the specific requirement that the local educational agency must use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional and developmental information about the child that will help determine not only whether the child is "a child with a disability" as defined in Section 602(3) of the law, but also that directly assist persons in determining the educational needs of the child. This includes gathering information related to enabling the child to be involved in and progress in the general curriculum (or, for preschool children, to participate in appropriate activities).

Thus, under IDEA 97, the major changes to the initial evaluation process, generally, are:

The use of existing evaluation data is expected to prevent unnecessary assessment of students and reduce the cost of evaluations.

Following the initial evaluation of the child, the determination of whether the child is a "child with a disability," as defined within IDEA, must be made by a team of qualified professionals and the child's parents. (Parental involvement in the eligibility decision is a new requirement in IDEA and is discussed further below.) A copy of the evaluation report and the documentation of determination of eligibility must be given to the parents.

The team of qualified professionals and the parent making the eligibility determination must take into consideration another new provision of the law--the "Special Rule for Eligibility Determination." This provision states that, in making an eligibility determination, "a child shall not be determined to be a child with a disability if the determinant factor for such determination is lack of instruction in reading or math or limited English proficiency" [Section 614(b)(5)].

When the proposed IDEA 97 was sent to Congress, it was accompanied by the Report [to accompany S. 717]--S. 717 was the bill number given to the proposed legislation. This report explained the intent behind proposed changes. With respect to the law's "Special Rule for Eligibility Determination," the report states:

Reevaluations

Under the previous law, each student receiving special education and related services was reevaluated every three years in all areas related to his or her disability. The purposes of this reevaluation were to determine if the child continued to be a "child with a disability" (as defined within IDEA) and what his or her present levels of educational performance and educational needs were.

Under IDEA 97, an LEA must ensure that a reevaluation of each child with a disability is conducted if "conditions warrant a reevaluation or if the child's parent or teacher requests a reevaluation, but at least once every 3 years" [Section 614(a)(2)(A)]. The new law, however, has streamlined the reevaluation process. Many of the aspects described above under initial evaluation apply as well to reevaluation. Now, at least every three years, the IEP Team and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, must review existing evaluation data on the child and, based upon that review and upon input from the parents, must identify what additional information (if any) is needed to determine:

As members of the IEP Team, parents participate in this review of existing data.

If IEP Team members (and other qualified professionals, as appropriate) feel that they do not have enough information to answer the above questions, then the LEA must administer such tests and other evaluation procedures as may be needed to produce the information identified by the team. Parents must give informed consent before their child may be reevaluated. The need for informed parental consent for reevaluation is new to the law; previously such consent was only needed for initial evaluations. If parents fail to respond to the LEA's request for consent to reevaluate the child, the LEA may proceed without it, if the LEA can demonstrate that it took reasonable measures to obtain the consent and the parents failed to respond.

On the other hand, upon examining the existing evaluation data, the IEP Team and other qualified professionals (as appropriate) may determine that sufficient data are available to determine whether the child continues to be a "child with a disability." In this case, the LEA is not required to conduct additional assessment of the child (unless requested to by the child's parents, as noted below). Parents must be notified of that determination and the reasons for it, as well as their right to request that their child be assessed to determine whether the child continues to be a "child with a disability," as defined within IDEA. If parents request such an assessment, the LEA must conduct it. As with initial evaluation, a copy of the evaluation report and the documentation of determination of eligibility must be given to the parent.

The Report [to accompany S. 717] provides an explanation regarding the changes IDEA 97 brings to the entire evaluation process--both initial evaluation and reevaluation. These remarks are provided in the box on the next page. To read the precise language of IDEA 97 in regard to the initial evaluation and reevaluation of children, see #29 in this News Digest.

Parent Participation in Eligibility and Placement Decisions

Under the old IDEA, parent participation was not required for making decisions regarding a student's eligibility for special education and related services. Under the new legislation, parents are specifically included as members of the group making the eligibility decision. (See #23 for the precise language of the law.)

Parent participation in placement decisions is similarly required. Under the old legislation, parent involvement in deciding the placement of their child was not required. The new IDEA clarifies the parents' right to be involved in such decisions. (See #28 for the exact language used in the new IDEA.)

Individualized Education Program Requirements

Each student's Individualized Education Program, or IEP, is a vital document, for it spells out the special education and related services that he or she will receive. The IEP is developed by a team that includes both parents and school professionals and, when appropriate, the student. The new IDEA maintains the IEP as a document of central importance and, in the hope of improving compliance, moves all provisions related to the IEP to one place in the law -- Section 614(d). (Under the prior law, IEP provisions were found in several different places.)

At the same time, several key changes have been made to what information the IEP must contain and the way in which the IEP is developed. These changes are to take effect on July 1, 1998. [The exception is provisions related to children with disabilities who have been convicted as adults and incarcerated in adult prisons. These provisions (see #22) take effect immediately.]

The information the IEP must include

The IEP retains many familiar components from previous legislation, such as statements regarding the student's present levels of educational performance, annual goals, special education and related services to be provided, projected dates for the beginning and end of services, and transition services for youth. However, some modifications have been made to these familiar components to place more emphasis within the law upon involving students with disabilities in the general curriculum and in the general education classroom, with supplementary aids and services as appropriate.

For example, "present levels of educational performance" must now include a statement of how the child's disability affects his or her involvement and progress in the general curriculum. Similarly, the IEP must contain a statement of special education and related services, as well as the supplementary aids and services, that the child or youth needs in order to: "...be involved and progress in the general curriculum...and to participate in extracurricular and other nonacademic activities; and...to be educated and participate with other children with disabilities and nondisabled children..." [Section 614(d)(1) (A)(iii)]

With these new IEP requirements, there is a clear intent to strengthen the connection between special education and the general education curriculum. As the Committee on Labor and Human Resources' Report [to Accompany S. 717] states:

Along the same line is the requirement that the IEP include an explanation of the extent to which the student will not be participating with nondisabled children in the general education class and in extracurricular and non-academic activities. This explanation of the extent to which the child will be educated separately is a new component of the IEP, yet is clearly in keeping with the changes noted above.

Other aspects of the IEP are entirely new as well. For example, each student's IEP must now include a statement of how the administration of State or districtwide assessments will be modified for the student so that he or she can participate. If the IEP team determines that the student cannot participate in such assessments, then the IEP must include a statement of (a) why the assessment is not appropriate for the child, and (b) how the child will be assessed. These changes work in tandem with changes elsewhere in the IDEA requiring that students with disabilities be included in State and districtwide assessments of student achievement.

Other new IEP requirements are statements regarding: (a) informing the student about the transfer of rights as he or she approaches the age of majority; (b) how parents will be regularly informed of their child's progress toward meeting the annual goals in the IEP; (c) where services will be delivered to the student; and (d) transition service needs of the student beginning at age 14 (see below, under "Transition Services," for a more detailed discussion of this new requirement).

To read the precise language of IDEA 97 in regard to the contents of the IEP, see #24.

Developing the IEP

The new IDEA maintains essentially the same process for developing the IEP -- namely, the document is developed by a multidisciplinary team, including the parents. However, the new legislation increases the role of the general educator on the IEP team, to include, when appropriate, helping to determine positive behavioral interventions and appropriate supplementary aids and services for the student.

Also added to the IEP process are "special factors" that the IEP team must consider. These factors include:

To read the precise language of IDEA 97 in regard to IEP development, see #25 in this News Digest.

Reviewing and revising the IEP

The language in the new IDEA emphasizes periodic review of the IEP (at least annually, as previously required) and revision as needed. A new, separate requirement exists: Schools must report to parents on the progress of their child with disabilities at least as frequently as progress of nondisabled children is reported, which seems likely to affect the revision process for IEPs. If it becomes evident that a child is not making "expected progress toward the annual goals and in the general curriculum," the IEP team must meet and revise the IEP.

The new legislation specifically lists a variety of other circumstances under which the IEP team would also need to review and revise the IEP, including the child's anticipated needs, the results of any reevaluation conducted, or information provided by the parents.

To read the precise language of IDEA 97 in regard to the reviewing and revising the IEP, see #26 in this News Digest.

Transition Services

The requirements for providing transition services for youth with disabilities have been modified in IDEA 97. While the definition of transition services remains the same, two notable changes have been made to IEP requirements:

The new law maintains 16 as the age when students' IEPs must contain statements of needed transition services. These two requirements -- one for students aged 14 and older and one for students aged 16 and older -- seem confusingly similar. However, the purpose of including certain statements for students beginning at age 14, according to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources' Report [to Accompany S. 717], "is to focus attention on how the child's educational program can be planned... [and] the provision is designed to augment, and not replace, the separate transition services requirement, under which children with disabilities [who are 16 or older] receive transition services..." (p. 22).

To read the precise language of IDEA 97 in regard to the transition services, see #24 in this News Digest.

Mediation

IDEA 97 establishes mediation as a primary process to be used in resolving conflicts between schools and the parents of a child with a disability. While prior legislation permitted mediation, the new legislation explicitly outlines States' obligations for creating a mediation system in which parents and schools may voluntarily participate. Among a State's obligations are:

Some parents may choose not to use mediation, and States may establish procedures requiring parents to meet with a impartial party who would explain the benefits of mediation and encourage them to make use of the process. See #32 in this News Digest for the verbatim language of the new IDEA regarding mediation.

Discipline of Children with Disabilities

Some of the most sweeping--and complicated--changes in the new IDEA are in the area of disciplining children with disabilities. To assist schools in understanding and complying with these new requirements, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP), U.S. Department of Education, released an initial guidance on September 19, 1997. (You can obtain this guidance from NICHCY or on the Internet at: www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/IDEA/memo.html) An essential means of developing an accurate understanding of IDEA 97's disciplinary requirements is to read the the law itself. As requested by OSEP, the discussion of discipline in this News Digest is kept to providing verbatim quotations from P.L. 105-17.

The requirements of law are found in Section 615(k), "Placement in Alternative Educational Setting." This section is divided into 10 subparagraphs (e.g., authority of school personnel, authority of hearing officer, determination of setting, manifestation determination review, and so on).

There is no substitute for reading exactly what the law says. If you are interested in or concerned about the disciplining of children with disabilities, we urge you to read Section 615(k) of IDEA 97 in its entirety. The complete, unabridged text of this section is presented in the side-by-side analysis, beginning at #35 and ending with #44.






The Next Steps

Laws passed by Congress provide a general framework of policy related to a particular issue. Once a law is passed, Congress delegates the task of developing regulations to guide the law's implementation to an administrative agency within the Executive Branch. These Federal regulations are published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The CFR interprets and further explains the law.

Regulations exist for the old IDEA, in CFR Title 34 Parts 300 to 338. Proposed regulations for IDEA 97 were published in the Federal Register on October 22, 1997. A 90-day period of public comment followed the publication of these proposed regulations, where individuals and groups provided feedback and identified concerns regarding what was proposed. Comments are being reviewed and, if appropriate, revisions will be made, and then final regulations will be published.

Until final regulations are available, States are required to implement IDEA 97 with the guidance available from old regulations (where these remain in accordance with the IDEA 97 statute) and from the language of the new statute (where new regulations do not exist to reflect and interpret changes that have occurred). Plans are to have final regulations by the Spring of 1998.

References

Committee on Labor and Human Resources. (1997, May 9). Report [to accompany S. 717]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. [Available from Superintendent of Documents, Attention: New Orders, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Charge orders may be telephoned to the Government Printing Office at (202) 512-1800. The Report is also available on-line, under "The Law," at: www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/IDEA.]


Getting a Copy of the New IDEA

There are several places from which you can obtain a copy of the new legislation. The quickest of these are Internet sites that have posted the law in its entirety. If you have access to the Internet, try: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/IDEA on the web site of the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), at the Department of Education; choose "The Law."

For a nominal fee, you can also obtain a copy of the new law by contacting: Superintendent of Documents, Attention: New Orders, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. Charge orders may be telephoned to the Government Printing Office at (202) 512-1800. Ask for a copy of Public Law 105-17, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997.







Effective Dates for IDEA 97

Although Congress passed the amendments to the IDEA, and President Clinton signed them into law, not all aspects of the new law became effective immediately. Here is a brief synopsis of effective dates for IDEA 97.





THE SIDE BY SIDE ANALYSIS OF THE OLD IDEA AND IDEA 97

Editorial Notes

To make it easy for you to move around in this analysis and locate specific sections of the law, we have numbered each of the aspects being discussed (example: "1-Old Law..." and "1-New Law...").

Use of quotation marks: The use of quotation marks (" ") in this section signifies verbatim quotations from the new law. As in the law itself, each quoted paragraph begins with a quotation mark. The closing quotation mark is placed at the end of the entire passage being quoted (not at the end of every paragraph). If material is not in quotes, it is a summary provided by the editor, NOT a verbatim quotation from the law.

Use of brackets: Within the verbatim quotations from the new law, you may find text within brackets [ ]. The material in brackets is NOT part of IDEA 97 -- it is information provided by the editor to explain references made within the law to other sections or paragraphs of the statute. Brackets at the end of a quotation indicate where, in the statute, you can find the text being quoted.


The IDEA's Framework

1-Old Law: How IDEA was organized

Nine Parts:
A -- General provisions, definitions, and discretionary program administration;
B -- School age and preschool programs;
C -- Centers-based discretionary programs;
D -- Training;
E -- Research discretionary programs;
F -- Instructional media;
G -- Technology and media;
H -- Infants and toddlers program; and
I -- Family support.

1-New Law: How IDEA 97 is organized

Four Parts:
A -- General provisions and definitions;
B -- School age and preschool programs;
C -- Infant and toddler programs; and
D -- Discretionary programs.




Part A: General Provisions: Definitions & Other Issues


2-Old Law: Serious emotional disturbance

Serious emotional disturbance was the designated disability category to be used for certain children with disabilities.

2-New Law: Serious emotional disturbance

Serious emotional disturbance remains as a disability category, but the new law inserts that this disability will be "(hereinafter referred to as emotional disturbance)." [Section 602(3)(A)(i)]



3-Old Law: Developmental delay

Developmental delay was an option that States could use to categorize children ages 3 through 5.

3-New Law: Developmental delay

Developmental delay may now be used, at the discretion of the State and the local educational agency, as a category for children with disabilities from ages 3 through 9.


4-Old Law: Educational service agency

Educational service agency was not defined in the old law.

4-New Law: Educational service agency

The new law defines educational service agency as a term that...


5-Old Law: Parents

The definition of parents was provided in regulations.

5-New Law: Parents

The term parents is now defined to include legal guardians and surrogate parents. [Section 602(19)]



6-Old Law: Related services

Orientation and mobility services were not specifically mentioned in the old law but were covered under regulations.

6-New Law: Related services

Orientation and mobility services are now specifically mentioned in the list of related services. [Section 602(22)]



7-Old Law: Supplementary aids and services

Supplemental aids and services were not defined in the statute or regulations.

7-New Law: Supplementary aids and services

The term supplementary aids and services is now defined as: "...aids, services, and other supports that are provided in regular education classes or other education-related settings to enable children with disabilities to be educated with nondisabled children to the maximum extent appropriate in accordance with section 612(a)(5)" [requirements concerning least restrictive environment]. [Section 602(29)]



8-Old Law: Transition services

Related services were not specifically included in the definition of transition services.

8-New Law: Transition services

Related services are now included in the definition of transition services. [Section 602(30)]



9-Old Law: Policy letters and regulations

The old law extended the department-wide 30-day period of public comment to 90 days and established a baseline for regulatory implementation. Policy letters were considered to be interpretations of policy, but not legally binding.

9-New Law: Policy letters and regulations

The new law at Section 607 clarifies procedures regarding the U.S. Department of Education's use of policy letters and other correspondence.






Part B: Assistance for Education of All Children with Disabilities



State Eligibility (Section 612 in the new law)

10-Old Law: State eligibility in general

Under the old IDEA, State plans needed to be in place.

10-New Law: State eligibility in general

State applications need to be submitted only once and thereafter only amendments need to be submitted, as necessitated by official findings of compliance problems, by changes in law or regulations designed to carry out the law, or by changes in interpretation of the law by a Federal court or a State's highest court. [Section 612(c)]



11-Old Law: Child find

Regardless of the severity of their disability, children with disabilities were to be identified, located, and evaluated.

11-New Law: Child find

The new law maintains prior requirements and clarifies that a State's child find efforts must include children in private schools.


12-Old Law: Least restrictive environment

Under the previous legislation, States had to establish procedures to assure LRE.

12-New Law: Least restrictive environment

The new law maintains the prior LRE definition and requirements and adds that, if a State's funding formula is not consistent with LRE, an assurance must be provided that it will be.


13-Old Law: Procedural safeguards

States had to have policies and procedures consistent with the provisions in Section 615.

13-New Law: Procedural safeguards

The new law adds specific requirements regarding nondiscriminatory testing.


14-Old Law: Transition from Infant & Toddler program to Preschool program

The old law identified requirements for transitioning a child from an infant/toddler program to a preschool program.

14-New Law: Transition from Infant & Toddler program to Preschool program

The new law maintains the prior requirements and adds the requirement that the LEA participate in transition planning conferences. [Section 612(a)(9)]



15-Old Law: Placement in private school

The old law provided for public services for children in private schools, under certain circumstances.

15-New Law: Placement in private school

The new law makes clear that a proportionate amount of IDEA funds must be spent on children with disabilities placed in private schools by their parents.



16-Old Law: Private school placements without consent of public agency

Reimbursement was available in certain circumstances.

16-New Law: Private school placements without consent of public agency

The new law requires parents to provide notice that they intend to transfer their child to a private school. If parents do not provide notice, reimbursement for this private school placement may be reduced or denied, with certain exceptions. Other limitations are also included.


17-Old Law: Personnel standards

The prior legislation required that (a) personnel had to be appropriately and adequately trained; (b) a State had to establish and maintain standards; and (c) when personnel did not meet the highest State standard for a specific profession or discipline, a State had to specify the steps it intended to take to retrain or hire personnel who did meet State standards.

17-New Law: Personnel standards

The new law maintains prior requirements regarding personnel standards and adds that the standards shall allow the use of paraprofessionals under certain conditions and allows a State to adopt a policy to allow the use of the most qualified persons available under certain conditions.



18-Old Law: Performance goals and indicators

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

18-New Law: Performance goals and indicators

The new law requires the State to establish goals for the performance of children with disabilities and to develop indicators to judge children's progress. A State must revise its State improvement plan based on assessment results, if it receives funds under subpart 1 of Part D.



19-Old Law: Participation in assessments

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

19-New Law: Participation in assessments

States are now required to include children with disabilities, with accommodations when necessary, in State and districtwide assessment programs. Alternative assessments must be developed for children who cannot participate in regular assessments by 2000. Results must be reported (while protecting individual children's identities).



20-Old Law: State Advisory Panel

The old law addressed panel membership and duties in more general terms.

20-New Law: State Advisory Panel

The new law describes in more detail both panel duties and membership, including representation from private and charter schools and from State juvenile and adult corrections agencies. A majority of the members must be individuals with disabilities or parents of children with disabilities.



21-Old Law: Charter schools

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

21-New Law: Charter schools

The new law added several provisions specific to charter schools. First, it requires that an LEA serve children with disabilities attending charter schools that are public schools of the LEA in the same manner as it serves children with disabilities in its other schools. An LEA must also provide funds to these charter schools in the same manner as it provides those funds to its other schools. [Section 613(a)(5)]

A second new provision with regard to charter schools is as follows:



22-Old Law: Services to prisoners in adult prisons

No prison-specific provisions existed in the old IDEA.

22-New Law: Services to prisoners in adult prisons

The new IDEA authorizes the Governor to transfer from the State Education Agency (SEA) to another agency (e.g., a State correctional agency) the general supervisory responsibility for educating juveniles with disabilities who have been convicted as adults under State law and incarcerated in adult prisons [Section 612(a)(11)(C)]. Additionally, the new legislation relieves the State from complying with certain requirements relating to assessments and transition services. If the State demonstrates a good faith security or compelling penological interest that cannot otherwise be accommodated, the IEP Team may modify such a child's IEP or placement [Section 614(d)(6)].




Evaluations, Eligibility Determinations, IEPs, and Educational Placements (Section 614 in the new law)

23-Old Law: Parent participation in eligibility decisions

The old law did not require schools to involve parents in decision-making regarding whether a child was eligible for special education and related services.

23-New Law: Parent participation in eligibility decisions

Under the new law, parents are specifically included as members of the group making the decision regarding a child or youth's eligibility for services.



24-Old Law: Individualized Education Program (IEP)

The old law listed specific components to be included in each child's IEP.

24-New Law: Individualized Education Program (IEP)

Except for those provisions covering youth convicted as adults and incarcerated in adult prisons (see #22), IEP provisions under the new law do not take effect until July 1, 1998. The new law requires that additional information be provided under most components of the IEP. Additional emphasis is placed on identifying the supplementary supports and services needed to enable the child to be educated in the regular classroom and with the general curriculum. New requirements include identifying the extent to which the child will participate in State or districtwide assessment. Schools are now required to report regularly to parents upon the child's progress toward the annual goals.

Components to be included in the IEP are:



25-Old Law: Development of the IEP

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

25-New Law: Development of the IEP

The new law adds specific factors that the IEP team must consider when developing a child's IEP, including, most notably, behavior issues and the specific communication needs of the child, if he or she is blind or visually impaired, of limited English proficiency, or deaf or hard of hearing.



26-Old Law: Review and revision of the IEP

Under the old IDEA, the IEP was to be reviewed and revised at least annually.

26-New Law: Review and revision of the IEP

The new law maintains prior requirements and adds new language emphasizing revision of the IEP, as appropriate.



27-Old Law: IEP Team

Members of the IEP Team were specified in the old IDEA.

27-New Law: IEP Team

The new law maintains prior requirements regarding IEP Team membership and adds members to the team, including the regular education teacher. The IEP Team, then, is a group composed of:



28-Old Law: Parent participation in placement decisions

Parents had the right to consent to or refuse decisions regarding their child's initial placement. However, the Federal statute did not require that they be a member of the team making the placement decision.

28-New Law: Parent participation in placement

The new law explicitly states parents' right to be involved in all placement decisions regarding their child. Unlike IEP changes, this change takes effect immediately.

"(f) Educational Placements. -- Each local educational agency or State educational agency shall ensure that the parents of each child with a disability are members of any group that makes decisions on the educational placement of their child." [Section 614(f)]



29-Old Law: Evaluation and reevaluation of students

Under Federal regulations to the old IDEA, each student with disabilities was initially evaluated to determine if he or she was a "child with a disability," as defined within IDEA, and what his or her present levels of educational performance and educational need were. Each student receiving special education and related services was also reevaluated every three years in all areas related to his or her disability. The data gathered through this reevaluation generally were used to determine if the student continued to be a "child with a disability" and what his or her present levels of educational performance and needs were.

29-New Law: Evaluation and reevaluation of students

IDEA 97 makes significant changes to the evaluation process by beginning with a review of existing evaluation data on the student. If sufficient information exists to make certain determinations, then the LEA is not required to conduct additional testing or other evaluation procedures. (However, in the case of a reevaluation, if parents request the reevaluation for the purpose of determining if the child continues to be a "child with a disability," then the LEA must conduct it.) If data are needed in a particular area, then the child would be evaluated in that area. Parents must give their informed consent before any evaluation can be conducted.

"(a) Evaluations and Reevaluations.--

"(b) Evaluation Procedures.--

"(c) Additional Requirements for Evaluation and Reevaluations.--




Procedural Safeguards (Section 615 in new law)

30-Old Law: Prior written notice

The parents or guardians were entitled to receive prior written notice whenever an agency proposed (or refused) to initiate or change the identification, evaluation, or placement of the child or the provision of FAPE.

30-New Law: Prior written notice

IDEA 97 requires prior written notice in certain circumstances and a procedural safeguards notice under certain circumstances.



31-Old Law: Notification by parents for filing a complaint

No similar provisions existed in the old law.

31-New Law: Notification by parents for filing a complaint

The new law adds a requirement that parents filing a complaint must provide the State educational agency or local educational agency with notice. The notice must contain specific information.



32-Old Law: Mediation

No similar provisions existed under the old law, although mediation was a permissible activity.

32-New Law: Mediation

The new law requires States to establish a mediation system in which parents and schools may voluntarily participate. The law specifies mediation requirements as follows:

"(e) Mediation. --



33-Old Law: Disclosure of evaluations and recommendations

The old IDEA's regulations regarding disclosure exist at 34 CFR 300.508 (a)(3) and provided that at a hearing the introduction of any evidence that has not been disclosed to the other party at least five days before the hearing was prohibited.

33-New Law: Disclosure of evaluations and recommendations

IDEA 97 adds a provision that, at least 5 business days before a hearing, each party must disclose all evaluations and recommendations. Any party failing to meet this requirement may be barred from introducing this evidence, unless the other party consents.



34-Old Law: Prohibition of attorneys's fees and related costs

The old law stipulated that no attorneys' fees may be awarded subsequent to the time of a written offer of settlement under certain circumstances.

34-New Law: Prohibition of attorneys' fees and related costs

The new law maintains prior requirements and adds that attorney fees may not be awarded for an IEP meeting unless the meeting is convened as a result of an "administrative proceeding or judicial action." Fees would also not be awarded for mediation prior to the filing of a due process complaint. Fees may be reduced in certain circumstances, including if the attorney representing the parents did not provide the school district with the appropriate information in the due process complaint [see #32, "Notification by Parents Filing a Complaint"].



35-Old Law: Maintenance of current educational placement and placement in alternative educational setting -- authority of school personnel

Under the old IDEA, during the time that a proceeding was being conducted, the child remained in his or her current educational placement (unless otherwise agreed by the SEA or LEA and parents), except in the case of a child who brought a firearm to school. Under what is known as the "Jeffords Amendment," such a child could be placed in an interim alternative educational setting for not more than 45 days. If a parent requested a due process hearing in a case involving a firearm, the child still remained in the interim placement.

35-New Law: Maintenance of current educational placement and placement in alternative educational setting -- authority of school personnel

IDEA 97 brings several changes to prior requirements, including expanding the school's right to take disciplinary action with children with disabilities who knowingly possess or use illegal drugs or sell or solicit the sale of a controlled substance while at school or school functions. Under certain circumstances, schools are required now to conduct a functional behavioral assessment and implement a behavior intervention plan.

Under the new law, "(k) Placement in Alternative Educational Setting" consists of 10 separate, but interrelated, subparagraphs: (1) Authority of school personnel; (2) Authority of hearing officer; (3) Determination of setting; (4) Manifestation determination review; (5) Determination that behavior was not manifestation of disability; (6) Parent appeal; (7) Placement during appeals; (8) Protections for children not yet eligible for special education and related services; (9) Referral to and action by law enforcement and judicial authorities; and (10) Definitions.

Subparagraphs (1)-(10) are presented below and, although reviewed separately, should be viewed as aspects of the same issue–the procedures for placing a child in an alternative educational setting.

"(j) Maintenance of current educational placement. -- Except as provided in subsection (k)(7) [see #41], during the pendency of any proceedings conducted pursuant to this section, unless the State or local educational agency and the parents otherwise agree, the child shall remain in the then-current educational placement of such child, or, if applying for initial admission to a public school, shall, with the consent of the parents, be placed in the public school program until all such proceedings have been completed.

"(k) Placement in alternative educational setting. --



36-Old Law: Authority of hearing officer

Under judicial interpretations of the old IDEA, a court could order the placement of a child to be changed if that placement was substantially likely to result in injury to the child or others.

36-New Law: Authority of hearing officer

The new IDEA has expanded the authority of hearing officers to place children in interim educational settings. (Note: See #44 for definition of "substantial evidence.")



37-Old Law: Determination of setting

No explicit provisions regarding determining interim alternative educational settings existed in the old IDEA until the Jeffords Amendment to the IDEA was added, which provided for the removal of a student for up to 45 days for bringing a firearm to school.

37-New Law: Determination of setting: Under IDEA 97, the IEP Team determines the interim alternative educational setting of the child. Additional requirements have been added.



38-Old Law: Manifestation determination review

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

38-New Law: Manifestation determination review

In the new law, immediately, if possible, but in no case later than 10 school days after the disciplinary action has been taken, the IEP Team and other qualified individuals shall review the relationship between the child's disability and the behavior subject to disciplinary action, to determine whether or not the behavior was a manifestation of the child's disability. The team must consider a wide range of information in making this determination.



39-Old Law: Determination that behavior was not a manifestation of disability

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.

39-New Law: Determination that behavior was not a manifestation of disability

Under the new law, if it is determined that the behavior was not a manifestation of the child's disability, the relevant disciplinary procedures applicable to children without disabilities may be applied to the child in the same manner in which they would be applied to children without disabilities, provided, however, that there is no cessation of educational services.



40-Old Law: Parent appeal of manifestation determination and interim alternative placement actions

Parental appeals were subject to IDEA's due process provisions. No explicit provisions regarding manifestation determination or interim alternative educational placements existed in the old law.

40-New Law: Parent appeal of manifestation determination and interim alternative placement actions

Under the new IDEA, if a parent disagrees with the determination or placement decision, the parent may request a hearing. The SEA or LEA shall arrange for an expedited hearing when requested by the parent. The hearing officer will make a determination as to whether the behavior was a manifestation of the child's disability.



41-Old Law: Placement during appeals

Under the prior legislation, during the pendency of any administrative or judicial proceeding regarding a complaint, the child remained in his or her current educational placement, unless the parents and public agency agreed otherwise. Under the Jeffords Amendment, the LEA could keep the student in the alternative educational setting during the pendency of the proceedings, unless the parents and the LEA agreed otherwise.

41-New Law: Placement during appeals

The requirements of the new law are as follow:



42-Old Law: Protections for children not yet eligible for special education

No similar provisions existed in the old IDEA.


42-New Law: Protections for children not yet eligible for special education

Under IDEA 97, a child who has not yet been found eligible for special education and who has violated a rule or code of conduct could assert the protections of the Act if the LEA had knowledge that the child was a child with a disability before the behavior occurred.



43-Old Law: Referral to and action by law enforcement and judicial authorities

No explicit provision existed in the old IDEA.

43-New Law: Referral to and action by law enforcement and judicial authorities

The new law makes clear that agencies are not prohibited from reporting a crime committed by a child with a disability to appropriate authorities. Similarly, the law does not prevent State law enforcement and judicial authorities from exercising their responsibilities. The agency reporting the crime must ensure that copies of the special education and disciplinary records are transmitted for consideration by the appropriate authorities.



44-Old Law: Definitions

Although most of the definitions provided in this subparagraph of IDEA 97 are drawn from other Federal laws, no similar definitions existed explicitly in the old IDEA. The Jeffords Amendment defined "weapon" as a "firearm" as that term was defined within Federal law.

44-New Laws: Definitions

The last subparagraph in Section 615(k) provides the definitions of terms used throughout this section.

[Editor's note: According to the Report [to accompany S. 717], the term ‘dangerous weapon' is defined as "a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury, except that such term does not include a pocket knife with a blade of less than 2-1/2 includes in length." (Committee on Labor and Human Resources, 1997, p. 34)]



45-Old Law: Transf