Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Parental Revocation of Consent for Continued Provision of Special Education and Related Services. Q and A Regarding 34 CFR § 300.300(b)(4).
Q and A Regarding 34 CFR § 300.300(b)(4)
On December 1, 2008, USDOE issued a series of new regulations for IDEA. These newly amended regulations took effect on December 31, 2008. While the new amendments implicate 11 different regulations, the most significant change involves 34 CFR § 300.300(b)(4), which now allows parental revocation of consent for special education and related services subsequent to the initial provision of those services.
(i)May not continue to provide special education and related services to the child, but must provide prior written notice in accordance with
§ 300.503 before ceasing the provision of special education and related services;
(ii)May not use the procedures in subpart E of this part (including the mediation procedures under § 300.506 or the due process procedures under §§ 300.507 through 300.516) in order to obtain agreement or a ruling that the services may be provided to the child;
(iii)Will not be considered to be in violation of the requirement to make FAPE available to the child because of the failure to provide the child with further special education and related services; and
(iv)Is not required to convene an IEP Team meeting or develop an IEP under §§ 300.320 and 300.324 for the child for further provision of special education and related services.
Q4: What procedures must a district follow in order to discontinue IEP services pursuant to a parent’s written revocation of consent (“WROC”)?
1. The district must promptly provide prior written notice of the change in educational placement and services that will result from the revocation of consent.
2. Within a reasonable period of time after prior written notice is provided to the parent, the district must discontinue all special education and related services.
1. A description of the action proposed or refused by the agency;
2. An explanation of why the agency proposes or refuses to take the action
The reason for the proposed cessation is that the action is mandated by receipt of the parent\'s written revocation of consent.
3. A description of each evaluation procedure, assessment, record, or report the agency used as a basis for the proposed or refused action
A copy of the current IEP could be attached to district’s PWN form.
4. A statement that the parents of a child with a disability have protection under the procedural safeguards of this part
The district should include a copy of the procedural safeguards. These must be amended to incorporate the revised rule.
5. Sources for parents to contact to obtain assistance in understanding the provisions of this part
A copy of Parent Handbook may contain this information. If not, it must be provided in addition to the Parent Handbook.
6. A description of other options that the IEP team considered and the reasons why those options were rejected
7. A description of other factors that are relevant to the agency’s proposal or refusal.
(NOTE: Since the cessation itself is mandated by regulation, the only component of the notice that is within the district\'s discretion is the timing of the cessation.)
The PWN should also inform the parent that subsequent to the cessation of services, the student will be a general education student and will not be entitled to IDEA’s procedural safeguards, including IDEA procedural safeguards in disciplinary situations.
- May be an effective way to inform parents.
Q11: Because discontinuing special education and related services pursuant to a parent’s written revocation of consent will necessarily entail a change in placement, are districts required to conduct an evaluation before discontinuing services?
Q12: May a parent revoke consent for only certain IEP services, for example, revoke consent for resource room programming but request that social work and speech services continue?
The student’s teachers “are not required to provide the previously identified IEP accommodations in the general education environment.”
“Nothing would prevent a general education teacher from providing a child whose parent has revoked consent for the continued provision of special education and related services with accommodations that are available to non-disabled children under relevant State standards. “
Q15: If the student ceases receiving special education and related services pursuant to a parent’s WROC and subsequently fails to progress in the general curriculum, may a parent file suit based upon that lack of progress?
Q16: May a student whose special education and related services were discontinued pursuant to a WROC be placed in a general education classroom that is co-taught by a special education teacher?
Q17: If a parent submits a written revocation of consent and all services cease, may a parent then request a 504 accommodation plan in lieu of the IEP that the district is now unable to implement due to the parent’s revocation?
Q19: After services have been discontinued pursuant to a parent’s WROC, may a parent subsequently request special education and related services?
The USDOE also states that although any evaluation to determine eligibility for special education and related services subsequent to a discontinuation of services is an initial evaluation.
Q20: Where both parents have provided initial consent for special education and related services, may one parent veto another parent’s consent to provide services by submitting a written revocation of consent to the district?
In the situation of dueling parents a district may be wise to convene an IEP team meeting to discuss the revoking parent’s rationale for revoking and further to inform them that only one parent’s consent is required to continue services.
Q21: May the written revocation of consent provision be used to circumvent providing special education and related services at “alternative schools.”