Placement of Students Ages 3-21 with Disabilities Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA): A Policy Discussion, May 2010

The provision of free appropriate public education (FAPE), an Individualized Education Program (IEP), and the least restrictive environment (LRE) have been important cornerstones of educating students with disabilities since the enactment of the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA), Public Law 94-142, in 1975, and its subsequent reauthorizations, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1990, 1997, and 2004. It is impossible to consider any one of these cornerstones without the others, when determining an appropriate educational placement for a student with a disability. The Iowa Department of Education has identified several practice issues regarding the interplay between FAPE, LRE, and the IEP in placement decisions for students with disabilities. To that end, this document will provide guidance for administrators of local education agencies (LEAs) and area education agencies (AEAs), as well as IEP teams (or other placement teams) within Iowa LEAs and AEAs when making placement decisions for eligible children with disabilities. This guidance will specifically discuss ten LRE and FAPE placement/program policy questions that have been identified by the Iowa Department of Education as needing attention. The policy discussions are consistent with the legal provisions of the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA (IDEA 2004) and its 2006 final federal implementing regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). This document is also consistent with the Iowa Administrative Rules of Special Education (2007) [hereinafter “Iowa Rules”]. In addition, the term local education agency (LEA) is used interchangeably for school district throughout this document. Prior to the discussion of specific policy questions, a federal and state legal framework for providing FAPE for students with disabilities within the LRE is briefly outlined. Pertinent FAPE and LRE court decisions that impact Iowa LEAs and AEAs are also included within Section II.

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Human Services : Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2002

State Agency Audit Report

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Corrections - Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2002

State Agency Audit Report - Combined Report

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Human Services: Schedules Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2003

State Agency Audit Report

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Corrections: Schedules Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2003

State Agency Audit Report

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Corrections, Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2004

State Audit Reports

County Recorders Electronic Transaction Fees Under the Control of the State Treasurer and the Iowa County Recorders Association, Auditor of State's Report for the Period July 1, 2003 through September 30, 2005

County Recorders Electronic Transaction Fees Under the Control of the State Treasurer and the Iowa County Recorders Association, Auditor of State's Report for the Period July 1, 2003 through September 30, 2005

How Much “Safety” Is Available under the U.S. Proposal to the WTO?, November 2005

Critics of the U.S. proposal to the World Trade Organization (WTO) made in October 2005 are correct when they argue that adoption of the proposal would significantly reduce available support under the current farm program structure. Using historical prices and yields from 1980 to 2004, we estimate that loan rates would have to drop by 9 percent and target prices would have to drop by 10 percent in order to meet the proposed aggregate Amber Box and Blue Box limits. While this finding should cheer those who think that reform of U.S. farm programs is long overdue, it alarms those who want to maintain a strong safety net for U.S. agriculture. The dilemma of needing to reform farm programs while maintaining a strong safety net could be resolved by redesigning programs so that they target revenue rather than price. Building on a base of 70 percent Green Box income insurance, a program that provides a crop-specific revenue guarantee equal to 98 percent of the product of the current effective target price and expected county yield would fit into the proposed aggregate Amber and Blue Box limits. Payments would be triggered whenever the product of the season-average price and county average yield fell below this 98 percent revenue guarantee. Adding the proposed crop-specific constraints lowers the coverage level to 95 percent. Moving from programs that target price to ones that target revenue would eliminate the rationale for ad hoc disaster payments. Program payments would automatically arrive whenever significant crop losses or economic losses caused by low prices occurred. Also, much of the need for the complicated mechanism (the Standard Reinsurance Agreement) that transfers most risk of the U.S. crop insurance to the federal government would be eliminated because the federal government would directly assume the risk through farm programs. Changing the focus of federal farm programs from price targeting to revenue targeting would not be easy. Farmers have long relied on price supports and the knowledge that crop losses are often adequately covered by heavily subsidized crop insurance or by ad hoc disaster payments. Farmers and their leaders would only be willing to support a change to revenue targeting if they see that the current system is untenable in an era of tight federal budgets and WTO limits.

Combined Report on the Institutions Under the Control of the Iowa Department of Human Services, Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2004

State Audit Reports

Combined Report on the Institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Human Services, Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2005

State Audit Reports

Combined Report on the Institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Corrections, Schedules, Findings and Recommendations, June 30, 2005

State Audit Reports

Combined audit report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Corrections for the five years ended June 30, 2006

Combined audit report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Corrections for the five years ended June 30, 2006

Combined audit report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Human Services including findings and recommendations and average cost per resident/patient information for the five years ended June 30, 2006

Combined audit report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Human Services including findings and recommendations and average cost per resident/patient information for the five years ended June 30, 2006

Combined report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Corrections for the five years ended June 30, 2007

Combined report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Corrections for the five years ended June 30, 2007

Combined report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Human Services for the five years ended June 30, 2007

Combined report on the institutions under the control of the Iowa Department of Human Services for the five years ended June 30, 2007