DESE's Answer To My Child Complaint

Bert Schulte


Interim Commissioner of Education
P.O. Box 430
Jefferson City, MO 65102-0480
http://dese.mo.gov/

•

Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
- Making a positive difference through education and service -

March 23,2009

Dr. David McGehee
Superintendent
Lee's Summit R-VII School District
301 N.E. Tudor Road
Lee's Summit, MO 64086-5702

Curtis and Sherri Tucker
1200 SE London Way
Lee's Summit, MO 64081

Re: Jacob Tucker

Dear Dr. McGehee and Mr. and Ms. Tucker:

The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has completed its investigation of the
child complaint filed against the Lee's Summit R-VII School District by Curtis and Sherri Tucker on
behalf of Jacob Tucker. The complaint was received on January 22,2009.

The attached decision, containing findings and conclusions, shall constitute the final decision of the
Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Bert Schulte

Interim Commissioner of Education

c: Mr. Jerry Keimig, Special Education Contact,
Lee's Summit R-VII School District
Ms. Janet Hoskins, Assistant Director, Special Education Compliance
Ms. Julie Bower, Supervisor, Special Education Compliance
Ms. Jackie Bruner, Director, Special Education Compliance
Ms. Pamela A. Williams, Coordinator, Special Education Services
Ms. Cynthia Quetsch, Legal Counsel, Division of Special Education
Ms. Heidi Atkins Lieberman, Assistant Commissioner, Division of Special Education

Child Complaint Decision

Re: Jacob Tucker

Findings and Conclusions

1. Allegation:

March 23, 2009

The Lee's Summit R-VII School District, in violation of state and federal regulations
implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), failed to develop an
Individualized Education Program (IEP) with appropriate goals to address Jacob Tucker's needs.

Findings:

Curtis and Sherri Tucker, parents of Jacob Tucker, allege the Individualized Education Program
(IEP) team did not develop appropriate IEP goals that address Jacob's needs. Ms. Tucker opines
that Jacob's goals do not state how Jacob will achieve the goals, what the method of therapy or
services will be used to help him achieve the goals, who will perform those services, how often
those services will be provided, and what the services are. In addition, she opines that the goals
developed for Jacob are not appropriate or achievable given his disability.

Jerry Keimig, director of special education, indicated the IEP team met on December 15, 2008,
and developed IEP goals based upon Jacob's evaluation data and current educational
performance. Conference notes reflect a discussion among IEP team members regarding the
appropriateness of Jacob's goals.

The present level of academic and functional performance (PLAAFP) of Jacob's IEP dated
December 15,2008, states that Jacob's disability affects his functional and academic
involvement and progress in regular education curriculum in the following manner: class
participation, staying on task, understanding and following directions, completing and turning in
work on time, organization, self advocating for make-up work, taking notes, expressing himself
through lengthy forms of written expression, test taking skills, understanding emotions of peers
and teachers, and general social skills. In addition, the PLAAFP indicates that Jacob continues
to need improvement with the following skills: following written directions, self advocacy,
organization, study skills, pragmatic language, coping skills, and social skills. Jacob's IEP has
five (5) goals which address increasing self advocacy, organization and study skills, pragmatic
social skills for maintaining conversations, identifying the impression he makes, and inferring
meaning from different social scenarios. The goals are measurable as they include specific
numbers to record level of attainment.

Decision:

State and federal regulations implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) require Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams to develop measurable annual
goals (including academic and functional goals) to meet the child's needs resulting from the
child's disability, enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education
curriculum, and meet each of the child's other educational needs that result from the child's
disability. Jacob's IEP dated December 15,2008, includes IEP goals that are related to the areas
identified as skill deficits in the present level of academic achievement and functional
performance (PLAAFP) and the areas in which Jacob's disability affects his functional and
academic involvement and his progress in the general education curriculum.

The state and federal regulations do not require that goals state how a student will achieve the
goal, the method of therapy or services, and who will provide the services. The services
summary of the IEP must include how often the services are provided and what the services are
but that information is not required to be written in the IEP goals. The service summary of

Jacob's IEP includes that information.

It is an IEP team's responsibility to develop appropriate goals on an individual basis based on the
academic and functional needs of the child. In this case, the IEP team met and developed goals
based upon Jacob's evaluation data and current academic achievement and functional
performance. Goals must be measurable. Jacob's goals were measurable. Based on the
foregoing, the Lee's Summit R-VII School District is found not out of compliance.

2. Allegation:

The Lee's Summit R-VII School District, in violation of state and federal regulations
implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), failed to include areas of
weakness and current evaluation results in Jacob Tucker's Individualized Education Program
(IEP).

Findings:

Curtis and Sherri Tucker, parents of Jacob Tucker, allege the Individualized Education Program
(IEP) team failed to address any ofJacob's areas of weakness and refused to put his current
evaluation scores in the present level of academic achievement.and functional performance
section of the IEP, therefore, resulting in Jacob's IEP not addressing his real needs.

Jacob's IEP dated December 15,2008, states that Jacob's disability affects his functional and
academic involvement and progress in the general education curriculum in the following manner:
class participation, staying on task, understanding and following instructions, completing and
turning in work on time, organization, self-advocacy for make-up work, taking notes, expressing
himself through lengthy forms of written expression, testing-taking skills, understanding the
emotions of peers and teachers, and general social skills. Jacob's IEP also states that Jacob
continues to need improvement with the following skills: following written directions, selfadvocacy,
organization, study skills, pragmatic language, coping skills, and social skills. Jacob's
IEP dated December 15, 2008, states that the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - 4th
Edition (WISC-IV) indicated that Jacob's abilities to sustain attention, concentration, and exert
mental control are a weakness relative to his nonverbal reasoning skills. Jacob's ability to
process visual material quickly is also a weakness relative to his nonverbal reasoning skills.

I

Jacob's reevaluation dated December 2,2008, which is included in the December 15, 2008, IEP,
states that his overall cognitive ability is within the average range as tested by the WISC-IV.
The Wechsler Non-Verbal Scale of Ability (WNV) indicated that Jacob's cognitive ability was at
the superior range. The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test - 2nd Edition (WIA T-II)
indicated that Jacob's reading and written language skills are in the high average range, while
math appears to be within the average range. The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales - 2nd
Edition, indicates moderately low to adequate adaptive skills observed at school.

Decision:

State and federal regulations implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) require Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams to consider the strengths of the
child and the results of initial or most recent reevaluation results. In this case, the IEP team
considered Jacob's strengths, weaknesses, and test scores; and the IEP includes strengths,
weaknesses, and the most recent reevaluation results. Therefore, the Lee's Summit R-VII School

District is found not out of compliance.

3. Allegation:

The Lee's Summit R-VII School District, in violation of state and federal regulations
implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), failed to allow Jacob
Tucker's parents to be an equal participant in the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team
process.

Findings:

Curtis and Sherri Tucker, parents of Jacob Tucker, allege the Individualized Education Program
(IEP) team failed to make Ms. Tucker an equal partner on the IEP team. Ms. Tucker reports that
she was told by the school district that she is the expert at horne and the district is the expert on
Jacob at school. Ms. Tucker contends that the Lee's Summit R-VII School District's failure to
allow her to tape record meetings and include her conference notes with the district's conference
notes, indicates that she was not a full participant on her son's IEP team.

Documentation indicates that Mr. and Ms. Tucker were invited to and attended the IEP meetings
on May 5, 2008, and December 15, 2008.

Jacob's IEP was amended on August 27,2008, and February 2,2009. The August 27,2008,
IEPamendment indicates that Ms. Tucker was present and agreed to the changes made to Jacob's
IEP. The February 2,2009, IEP amendment indicates that Ms. Tucker agreed to the IEP
amendment via email.

Parent concerns are set forth in Jacob's IEP. In addition, Joy Rose, special education process
coordinator, informed Ms. Tucker on October 13, 2008, that all of Ms. Tucker's
communications, including parent conference notes from IEP meetings, are placed in Jacob's
special education file.

Documentation indicates there are multiple emails and correspondence dated January 23,2008,
to January 27,2009, between Ms. Tucker and various district personnel. There were numerous
communications about Jacob's progress, goals, and implementation of the IEP. Some of the
parent's requests for evaluation were granted and some refused. Ms. Tucker was provided with
draft IEPs prior to each IEP meeting. Ms. Tucker submitted a classroom observation report to
the IEP team with suggestions prior to the December 15, 2008, IEP meeting. The district
responded to numerous issues raised by Ms. Tucker, but did not always provide the relief Ms.
Tucker requested. The district offered to meet with her to discuss her concerns.

The Lee's Summit Board of Education policy states that the use of audio, video, or other
recording devices at IEP meetings or Section 504 meetings is strictly prohibited in accordance
with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The policy also states that exceptions to this policy will
only be made when such recordings are necessary to ensure parental rights that are guaranteed
under Part B of the_IDEA. These requests must be made within a-reasonable-period oftime prior
to the scheduled meetings.

Decision:

State and federal regulations implementing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA) require that input be considered from all IEP team members when developing a student's
Individualized Education Program (IEP) and that the district take steps to ensure that parents are
present and given an opportunity to participate. There is no requirement that parents be an
"equal" decision-maker nor is there any standard to determine the quantity or quality of
participation. Considering input and allowing participation does not require the team to include
all the input in the student's IEP. In this case, documentation reflects that Ms. Tucker was given
an opportunity to participate as a member of the IEP team. Therefore, the Lee's Summit R-VII
School District is found not out of compliance.

I