INTEGRATED FIE

LISD Special Education

SY 12-13

WHAT IS INTEGRATED? in·te·grat·ed

   /ɪntɪgreɪtɪd/ Show Spelled [in-ti-grey-tid] –adjective

1. combining or coordinating separate elements so as to provide a harmonious, interrelated whole: an integrated plot; an integrated course of study.

2. organized or structured so that constituent units function cooperatively: an integrated economy.

3. having, including, or serving members of different racial, religious, and ethnic groups as equals: an integrated school. Compare segregated.

WHO INTEGRATES?Every person who evaluates a student for

special education works collaboratively to integrate their information into a cohesive, harmonious, interrelated document that describes the evaluation, identifies the student’s strengths and needs, and makes recommendations to assist the student in the public school.

WHO INTEGRATES? All evaluators must integrate their

information into the FIE.This includes some contractors – consult

with director to see if that is part of their contract.

Music Therapists will also integrate their info into the FIE.

No separate FIE will be completed. A DER is required only for OHI, OI, TBI, or

any other form that requires a physician signature.

If LSSP is assigned evaluation and they choose to assign it to an intern then the intern will contact the Team Lead to add their name to the team members in ARM.

HOW INTEGRATION WORKS! AI/VI/APE/Related Services – will

complete their relevant sections of the FIE.

Each person enters their information in the Consideration of Special Education Criteria.

The Final Editor will ensure the determinations of the AI/VI/APE/Related Services personnel are reflected in the Consideration of Special Education Criteria section of the FIE.

COMMUNICATION/COLLABORATION ARE KEY!

DOWNLOAD DATE The FIE must be dated by the 60th calendar

day from the parent consent date for initial evaluations. Parent consent date is day one. This is the absolute date calculated in SEAS.

It is essential that evaluators take into account all factors that could impact the ability to get the report in the hands of the parent 3 school days prior to ARD.

These factors include: Securing signatures Downloading/Revising Supervising Assessment Specialists review or Supervising LSSP review

ER No ER is sent until consent is obtained. As soon as consent is obtained, the ER is

sent to the ER Secretary. This is the responsibility of the Assessment Specialist. Clerks do not send ER forms.

The comments section of the ER will specify the projected download date. The projected download date is generally no more than 3

school days prior to the date the FIE has to go home to the parent.

The final FIE must be in the hands of the parent at least 3 school days prior to ARD/IEP meeting.

The comments section must also contain the name of the Final Editor. If AU eval it is assumed the AU Team LSSP is the Final Editor.

There should be one ER listing all personnel assigned by ER Secretary.

ADDITIONAL EVALS ON ER If additional evaluation is requested after

an ER has been generated, the ER will be updated by the Assessment Specialist and sent again to the ER Secretary.

If the evaluation is for suspected ED, the ER should include the special education counselor.This is a way to prompt communication

between the LSSP and Sp Ed Counselor.LSSP, in collaboration with Sp Ed Counselor,

determines needs for counseling as a related service. Typically the counseling evaluation is included in the LSSP’s evaluation.

ER ER is generated in Forms Packet and sent to

ER Secretary through SEAS. ER Secretary assigns personnel and sends the

ER to them in SEAS. LSSP/AU requests are sent to Vera who assigns the personnel.

Re-evals for ADHD (OHI) no longer require completion of a psychological evaluation. The OHI form can be sent directly to the physician once consent for release/exchange of information is received from the parent.

Assigned evaluation personnel notify ER Secretary when evaluation is completed.

ER forms are never archived – they are inter-office communication

DUE DATE ON ER The actual due date is reflected on the ER. Do not buffer the due date to speed

evaluators up or ensure they do not miss a timeline.

Collaboration/Communication/Trust Comments may request that evaluation be

completed one week before due date for editing purposes.

The evaluators should collaborate to ensure they have ample time to secure signatures before FIE is sent home.

No ARD/IEP meeting should be scheduled before due date specified on the ER.

HEADS UP Either print out or email a copy of the

ER to give a heads up that this will be coming for the evaluators or

Send an email to the evaluators to give them a heads up that an ER is being generated.

COMMUNICATE!

INFORMED CONSENT LSSP must be invited to attend informed

consent meeting for psychological evaluations or autism evaluations.

If LSSP is unable to attend the informed consent meeting, parents must be informed that the evaluation could result in a recommendation of ED, AU, etc. to the ARD Committee.

If referral involves concerns about inattention get release for LSSP to talk with physician. work to secure OHI prior to initial ARD meeting.

Note: Indicate vision/hearing status in notes on ER.

ER REMINDERS:

Due date is actual due date. Download date may be before due date

and is written in the reason for referral section.

Final Editor is named on the ER. If AU put AU Team LSSP as Final Editor.

If additional evaluation is requested for reevaluation, complete ER to notify all persons involved in the reevaluation.

THE FIE SENT HOME: Must be the final version. Must contain the required signature(s). Must be completed by the projected

download date:This includes OHI, OI, TBI, etc. eligibility DER

whenever possible. If the OHI, OI, TBI, etc. eligibility form is not received

prior to ARD, a subsequent ARD meeting must be convened to consider the OHI DER when it is received.

Prompt action is necessary whenever outside information is required or a physician’s signature is necessary for the DER (OHI, OI, TBI).

CAUTION DURING INITIAL EVALUATION: If it is determined during initial evaluation that

additional testing is needed: In any area not discussed at informed consent Or in any area of concern brought up by the

parent that was not discussed at informed consent then

The evaluator must consult with the discipline associated with that area of concern.

Additional informed consent must be obtained. When the request for additional evaluation(s)

occur at an initial ARD meeting, it is clear that we did not have sufficient data to develop an IEP and can cause issues should a due process be filed.

FIE STILL MUST BE COMPLETED: If parent has not returned

information or there is outstanding information, the FIE still must be completed by the due date.

If information is received at the ARD or afterwards, an FIE Addendum is written.

IF EVALUATION DATA RECEIVED AT OR AFTER ARD THAT REVIEWED FIE:

Document in the ARD deliberations that the forms were presented at the ARD and that an FIE Addendum will be written within 30 calendar days and a subsequent Brief ARD will be scheduled to review the information OR

If documentation is received after the ARD then an email or written note is sent to the parent informing them:

“the information presented will be integrated into an FIE Addendum and a Brief ARD scheduled within 30 calendar days to review the FIE Addendum.”

The email is kept as documentation and scanned into SEAS.

IF EVALUATION DATA FROM PARENT RECEIVED AFTER DOWNLOAD DATE BUT BEFORE ARD:

AND FIE due date is not past:Notify parent that a revised FIE will be

completed and presented to them at the ARD.

A section should be completed before Summary section that states: ‘The following information was received after

the FIE was completed and the results incorporated into this section. The results of the additional information are reflected in the Summary and Conclusions section of the FIE.’

IF EVALUATION DATA FROM PARENT RECEIVED AFTER DOWNLOAD DATE BUT BEFORE ARD:

AND FIE due date is past:Notify parent in writing that an FIE

Addendum will be completed and presented to them at the ARD

A section should be completed in the FIE Addendum before the Summary section that states ‘The following information was received after the FIE was completed. The results have been incorporated into this section and will be reflected in the Summary and Conclusions section of the FIE.’

DATA RECEIVED Even if parent has signed and dated

information prior to the FIE date, the date received by the district is the date reflected in our use of the materials: If checklists are returned after download

date but are dated prior to the download date, we reflect that this information was received by the district on mo/da/yr and integrate the data into the report.

EVALUATIONS BETWEEN INITIAL AND REEVALUATION – FIE ADDENDUMS NO ER is sent until consent is obtained. The FIE Addendum template report will be initiated

in ARM by the Assessment Specialist, LSSP or SLP. The report will be titled “FIE Addendum mo/da/yr”. If original FIE is 24 months or older, the ARD/IEP

Committee should consider all new evaluation data. If more than one discipline is evaluating, a team

leader is selected by the disciplines. The FIE Addendum will be completed by the person

doing additional evaluation. The FIE Addendum will be sent to the Assessment

Specialist to archive the report unless it is only being completed by the LSSP or SLP.

REMINDER! You must change the title of the report to:

FIE Addendum mo/da/yrUse this title in the footer also:

Student Name FIE Addendum mo/da/yr page #

Reference the previous FIE and date in the Reason for referral section of the addendum report.

This does not happen automatically – you must change the title that will appear automatically for any report generated in ARM.

ADDITIONAL EVALUATIONS RECOMMENDED BY ARD C If additional evaluation comes up during an

ARD meeting and the discipline that would be involved is not present you must:Adjourn the meeting until that discipline can

be present orTake a break and call the discipline member

to see if they can participate by phone or come to the meeting

Please note that this usually happens when a parent brings up additional evaluation(s)/concerns.

ADDITIONAL EVALUATION TIMELINE: The ARD C determines when any

additional evaluation will be completed. Evaluators must adhere to the timeline

established by the ARD C. If it becomes necessary to extend the

timeline another ARD must be held or a change of ARD agreement signed prior to the deadline established by the ARD C.

MINIMUM TIMELINES FOR ADDITIONAL EVALUATIONS

Generally 30 school days will be given to complete additional evaluations requested by the ARD Committee.

If the evaluation is for Autism the timeline will be 45 school days.

It is best to plan well in advance in order to give the evaluation personnel

adequate time to complete the evaluation.

SUBSEQUENT FIE DUE DATES The REED/ARD Committee determines

the need for any additional evaluation. The same committee establishes the

due date for completion of the additional evaluation.

Documentation in ARD:Brief REED/ARD – document on page 1Annual – document on page 2a

TRIENNIAL REEVALUATIONSIf portions of a previous evaluation are pulled

forward but it is determined that additional evaluation will be completed, the Assessment Specialist, LSSP, or SLP will be the Final Editor to initiate and finalize the new FIE. The REED/ARD should document all information addressing

the required components of the FIE. The new FIE should include a statement of the REED/ARD’s

decision to pull information forward, a summary of previous evaluation data, and the new evaluations which are being completed.

The decision to pull information forward should be entered into a note in SEAS to show that portions of previous evaluation dated mo/da/yr were pulled forward into new FIE dated mo/da/yr.

An ARD meeting must be convened to review the new FIE and put in place appropriate programming based upon the new evaluation data.

ADDITIONAL EVALUATIONS If any additional evaluation is requested for a

reevaluation, the informed consent meeting must inform the parent:

“all previous evaluation information will be summarized and included in the new FIE as well as current data that reflects the additional evaluation.”

This should be documented in the REED/ARD minutes.

The Final Editor will review the previous FIE to summarize the data that was pulled forward.

Students may only be REEDed forward one time and then new evaluation is required.

NOTES ON REEVALUATIONS It is up to the REED/ARD Committee (which

should include appropriate evaluation personnel) to determine the needed re-evaluation data.Ex: If a student is LD/SI and is due for a 3 year

re-evaluation, the REED/ARD may determine to do new achievement testing in reading and new receptive language evaluation as these are the areas the child has difficulties in.

Ex: If a student is AU/SI and is due for a 3 year reevaluation, the REED/ARD may determine that a behavioral rating scale and pragmatic language evaluations are all that are needed.

DER DATES FOR REEDED FORWARD INFORMATION If a determination is made to REED an

eligibility forward any previous DER date is not changed.

Ex: If OHI dated 8/21/08 is pulled forward on 8/21/11, the OHI evaluation date does not change. The FIE date will change to the date the ARD Committee accepted the REED recommendations.

The information should be entered into a note in SEAS to show that portions of previous evaluation dated mo/da/yr were pulled forward into new FIE of mo/da/yr.

OHI If OHI is not in hand to present at initial

ARD meeting, a subsequent ARD must be held to review OHI DER. If the only suspected disability is the OHI then the ARD will be a DNQ until the OHI form is in hand to present to the ARD C.

If OHI is not in hand at any subsequent ARD the ARD may be recessed while waiting for the OHI.

The FIE will contain sufficient information for the ARD Committee to link the OHI to the child’s needs.

This is also true for OI, TBI, or any other form that must be signed by a physician.

IF EVALUATION DATA IS REEDED FORWARD:

The date the ARD Committee accepts the recommendations of the REED becomes the new FIE date. This may all happen at one meeting.The date(s) of any previous DERs will not

change but a note should be entered into SEAS documenting what has happened.

CAUTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL EVALUATIONS FOR STUDENTS ALREADY IN SPECIAL ED:

If additional evaluation is requested ensure that the scope of the evaluation is considered for all areas: Ex: If speech only turns

into AU then language is still added because of the need for the SLP to complete pragmatic language evaluation.

If additional evaluation is requested and portions of previous evaluation(s) are pulled forward consider the summary needs for the new FIE: NOTE: The Final Editor must

summarize previous information in the appropriate section(s) of the new FIE.

PREVIOUS EVALUATION SUMMARY FORM(REQUIRED WHEN NO NEW EVALUATION IS REQUESTED) Prior to REED/ARD and after consultation with service

providers, if it is anticipated that the recommendation will be to accept existing data to continue a category of disability, then the Previous Evaluation Summary Form will be completed.

  The Assessment Specialist/SLP will review and

summarize the last two FIE’s starting with the most recent. This summary must include: Type of evaluation, (i.e. Initial, Re-evaluation, Another District) Category of Disability, Related/Instructional Services Provided Must include: Area Assessed, Date/Tests, and summarized results

Previous Evaluation Summary Form

Student: ______________________________ ID#: ___________________ Grade: ________ REED/ARD Date: _____________________

FIE: Initial __ Re-evaluation __ Another District __ Date: Grade Level: Category of Disability: Related/Instructional Services: Area Assessed Date/Tests Results Cognitive/Intellectual

Achievement

Speech

Psych

Other

Other

FIE: Initial __ Re-evaluation __ Another District __

Date: Grade Level: Category of Disability: Related/Instructional Services: Area Assessed Date/Tests Results Cognitive/Intellectual

Achievement

Speech

Psych

Other

Other

PRIOR TO REED/ARD:Assessment Specialist/SLP should ensure:

Contact teacher secures Teacher Input forms from Gen Ed Teacher

The Information from Ed. Records form is completed by Sp Ed Teacher

The Developmental History form is sent to the parent to be completed

The vision/hearing screening request form is sent to the nurse to be completed

All previous evaluation(s) are reviewed in order to make recommendations for evaluation

HOMEBOUND REFERRALS New referral to sp ed for homebound services

always requires a FIE to be written by the Assessment Specialist: If student is already sp ed, a FIE must be written of

existing data and include new information that warrants Homebound placement if original FIE is more than 24 months old. If original FIE is less than 24 months old, an ARD C considers any new information or evaluation data as appropriate. The FIE template for Homebound in ARM is used.

If not sp ed the LISD Homebound FIE template in ARM must be completed.

60 day timeline for completion of FIE still applies to initial referrals for Homebound Services.

WRITING THE REPORT Team selects team leader to initiate report in

ARM.Team leader should include campus based

evaluation personnel (if AU Team or other outside evaluators) so the campus personnel will be able to access the report later (the sp ed teacher is a part of the multidisciplinary team).

Only one report will be started in ARM and must be started by the team lead (Assessment Specialist, LSSP, or SLP).

All necessary sections should be added to the template before anyone starts writing. Changing the template after it is started causes loss of data and frustrates everyone (AI/VI, OT/PT sensory motor, etc.)

All assigned team members should have edit rights except for teachers – teachers have read only rights.

WRITING THE REPORT: When reporting evaluation results

ensure that all recommendations are in the recommendation section of the FIE.This will allow teachers to have all

recommendations to utilize when drafting the PLAAFP.

Example: Don’t put recommendations for OT in the OT section – they should be written in the recommendations section of the FIE.

TEACHERS ACCESS TO FIE

Teachers will have access to the FIE once it is archived to use Summary and Conclusions and Recommendations sections in the development of the PLAAFP.

Since teachers will not have access until archived the Final Editor will print out the Summary and Conclusions and Recommendations sections for the teacher to use in the development of the PLAAFP. This is essential since the teacher must use this information to develop the PLAAFP.

THE ‘MEAT’ OF THE REPORT: Summary and Conclusions should reflect

the identified strengths/needs of the student.

Recommendations should be clearly written and incorporated into the PLAAFP to ensure appropriate standards based IEPs can be developed.

Consideration of Special Education Criteria should clearly summarize the identified categories of disability, related services, and/or itinerant instructional services identified in the FIE.

REMEMBER:Goals/ObjectivesAccommodations

PLAAFP

Evaluation

Goals/ObjectivesAccommodations

PLAAFP

Evaluation

Place

men

t

That leads to appropriate:

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Make recommendations based upon the

total information obtained during the evaluation.

Recommendations are required even if the student does not qualify.

Address cognitive and academic strengths and needs to guide the teachers in teaching the student.

SUBJECTIVE VS. OBJECTIVE All data that is reported in the FIE

should be based upon objective information that can be defended and quantified.

Information that is subjective should be qualified by inserting statements such as ‘in the professional opinion of the examiner’.

WRITING THE REPORT Use the LISD templates only. Do not

create your own templates. Each team member should complete

their section of the FIE.Collaboratively decide which sections each

member is responsible for completing.Do not reword or change any team

member’s section unless you have contacted them and obtained their permission to do so.

WRITING THE REPORT Some sections may be written jointly

If this is the case it is essential that you do not erase any person’s additions to that section.

If written separately, it is important that the various sections flow and that the report “funnels” to a logical, understandable conclusion with recommendations.

COMMUNICATION IS ESSENTIAL!

WRITING THE REPORT All disciplines must complete their

respective sections in ARM or in WORD depending on the team’s collaborative agreement.Before archiving, the document must be

edited for correct spacing, spelling, grammar, and general look of the report.

Font recommendation is Arial size 10; margins should be 1.0 all around.

Concerns about interpretation, wording, or phrasing are directed to the team member who completed that section in ARM.

WRITING THE REPORT

If the team decides to start the report in ARM and finish it on the ‘s’ drive:All required sections must be completedNo templates outside of ARM may be used

unless approved by discipline directorsFormat and appearance must be consistent

with that of the ARM generated FIE

LISD FIE STANDARD FORMAT Arial font size 10 is to be used for all FIE reports. When reporting information:

Use the name of the student instead of ‘the student…’

Use the name of the parent (e.g. “Mrs. Smith, parent of …” or “the mother reported…”) – don’t use familiar terms such as mom or dad.

Use complete sentences. Third person should be used throughout the

report (“He”, “Mr. Jones”, “Brandon”, “This evaluator”, etc., and not “You” or “I”).

Each discipline’s section should match other sections in style and English usage.

Do not use graphs in the LISD FIE.

LISD FIE

SECTION SAMPLES

REASON FOR REFERRAL

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student was referred for a full and individual evaluation due to ongoing academic difficulties in the general education classroom. This is an initial evaluation for Student to determine if the student has a category of disability as defined in federal and state law.

Student has problems in class.

TESTS ADMINISTERED

Acceptable Unacceptable

Each evaluator will list their evaluations completed with this student. This fulfills the sources of data requirement for evaluations.

List only those evaluations administered by final editor.

Exhaustive list (e.g., from template) of all tests that might be given – without removing ones that were not given.

EDUCATIONAL HISTORY

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student has attended public schools for 5 years. He is currently in the fourth grade and has never been retained. Student has maintained passing grades throughout his education until the 3rd grade year. At that time student began to struggle with concepts in reading and mathematics. Student was not able to pass the state mandated assessment in 3rd grade in reading or math. Student has always had good attendance and has been in the same school for all five of his educational years.

Student comes to school.

REVIEW OF RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student was provided interventions for academic difficulties in reading and math beginning the second semester of 3rd grade. The interventions of additional reading supports and individual re-teach were provided for 12 weeks before the student was provided more intensive supports due to a lack of progress as documented by the data presented to the parents to inform them of his struggles. Interventions have included individual instruction using a systematic reading program to develop phonemic awareness, comprehension, and ability to inference. Math interventions have included a program that systematically provides visual and auditory cues to assist the student in solving word problems.

Student was provided tutoring before school for 3 weeks.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student was born by c-section following a typical pregnancy. No issues or problems were reported by the parent. Student achieved all developmental milestones within expected limits and no issues were reported by the parent. Student attended private preschool from age 1 through 4 years of age. No issues or concerns were reported. When student began kindergarten communication issues were reported by the teacher including misarticulation of certain sounds and difficulty understanding and following directions.

Student was born.

HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENTAL HISTORY

Acceptable Unacceptable

Based on the health screening completed by school nurse on 9/15/11, Student’s vision and hearing are within normal limits unaided.  Parents report student met all developmental milestones.  Based on information provided by parent/nurse, Student does not have a significant health history which directly affects his ability to profit from the educational process. Student’s fine and gross motor abilities appear to be average, based on informal assessment. According to his mother, Student is usually in good health and is physically fit. He sustained a slight head injury more than four years ago; he did not lose consciousness. Parent reported that Student's vision is normal, and that his vision was tested recently by an optometrist. Student has difficulty hearing but does not use a hearing aid. He had an otolaryngologist's hearing test recently. At night, Student typically sleeps soundly for 8 or 9 hours.During pregnancy, Student’s mother had no significant health problems. Student’s delivery was normal. His early motor skills, such as sitting up, crawling, and learning to walk, developed normally. His early language development, such as first words, asking simple questions, and talking in sentences, seemed to be typical. Student had frequent ear infections throughout infancy and early childhood. Student was previously diagnosed with ADHD and took medications in the past. He is currently not taking any medications.

Student can see and hear.

LANGUAGE BACKGROUNDCOMMUNICATION DEVELOPMENT

Acceptable Unacceptable

According to the Home Language Survey, the language spoken by Student is English. The language spoken in the home is English. And based on informal data, Student's level of proficiency in receptive language is average and his level of proficiency in expressive language is average according to teacher and parent input. Student expresses himself best orally. Use of oral speech is Student’s best method of communication.

 

Student is from an English speaking home.

SPEECH

Acceptable Unacceptable

On 2/10/12, Mrs. SLP, M.S., CCC-SLP informally evaluated Student's articulation, voice and fluency skills during conversational speech. During conversational speech, Student was intelligible and able to produce all speech sounds correctly except for the [th] sound.  Student’s articulation skills were judged to be within normal limits. Student's voice quality, pitch, and resonance were judged to be within normal limits when he spoke orally during the assessment.  No dysfluencies were observed during the evaluation. Student’s fluency skills appear to be within normal limits.

Speech appears to be ok.

LANGUAGE FUNCTIONING

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student's receptive and expressive language skills were formally evaluated by Mrs. SLP, M.S., CCC-SLP, on February 10th and March 9th, 2012.  Results indicate average abilities in receptive, expressive, and pragmatic language skills as evidenced by the following formal evaluation results.

Student understands what he hears.

BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL/EMOTIONAL FUNCTIONING

Acceptable Unacceptable

At the time of this assessment, Parent described Student as active and sociable, but also unmotivated and impulsive. (These descriptions are based on Parent’s observations of Student over the previous year.) At times, Student seems unhappy, but overall, his mood varies normally. He often fidgets with his hands or feet, or squirms. His social interaction skills are typical for boys his age. Parent said that Student generally dislikes school; his level of effort toward schoolwork varies.Some things that Parent reported may be significant. Student frequently fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes. He seems to have difficulty organizing his tasks and activities. He often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly. Student often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that are difficult for him. He is often easily distracted; he forgets chores he is supposed to do and loses his personal belongings.Mrs. Teacher described Student as playful and caring, but also distractible and unmotivated. (This information, provided by Mrs. Teacher, represents her observations of Student over the previous month.) At school, Student's mood is typical of others his age, with normal variations. Teacher said that Student needs more one-to-one attention and completes less schoolwork than most boys his age.

No behaviors were reported or observed.

TEST INTRODUCTIONS

Acceptable Unacceptable

The Woodcock-Johnson® III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ III COG) was administered to Student on 4/24/12. This assessment of cognitive ability contains various subtests, each measuring a different aspect of cognitive ability. The test assesses several aspects of cognitive abilities including short-term memory (Gsm), comprehension-knowledge (Gc), fluid reasoning (Gf), long-term retrieval (Glr), processing speed (Gs), visual-spatial thinking (Gv), and auditory processing (Ga). Additionally, the WJ III COG includes clusters of broad categories of cognitive abilities that affect cognitive performance. These categories are verbal ability (also referred to as acquired knowledge), thinking ability, and cognitive efficiency.

The WJ-III COG NU assesses general intellectual ability, specific cognitive abilities and oral language.

The WJ-III Achievement NU measures academic achievement in the areas of reading, math, writing, academic knowledge and oral language

Tests were given on Tuesday and Wednesday.

TABLES OF SCORES

Acceptable Unacceptable

Scores: Woodcock-Johnson III, Tests of Cognitive Abilities with normative updates

Factor Clusters: SS %-ile Descriptor

LONG-TERM RETRIEVAL 64 1 Very Low

AUDITORY PROCESSING 98 45 Avg

PROCESSING SPEED 87 19 Low Avg

SHORT-TERM MEMORY 80 9 Low Avg

PHONEMIC AWARENESS 100 50 Average

1 to 2.

SUBTEST DEFINITIONSSubtest definitions should be used rarely

as they are confusing to parents and don’t provide meaningful information for them.

Subtest information can be integrated into the interpretation sections of the report. E.g., “On a task that taps auditory short-term memory, Brandon demonstrated average ability compared to his age peers.”

TEST RESULTS

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student's performance on the cognitive and achievement portion of the evaluation suggested that most of her cognitive scores fell in the low average range of functioning with two scores in the average range and all memory scores in the very low average of functioning.  Her identified weaknesses in all areas of memory were considered substantial.  These will have a negative effect on all academic areas as will her oral language weaknesses that were identified through the speech evaluation.   Her academic testing reflected scores that were commensurate with cognitive scores and ranged between below average to average. 

No pattern of strengths and weaknesses was identified from this battery of tests. Student appears to be working at her ability level in all areas.

Low.

COGNITIVE FUNCTIONING

Acceptable Unacceptable

Based on the assessment information obtained, Student is functioning in the average range of cognitive abilities. Specific strengths were noted in Student’s crystallized verbal ability which refers to the ability to apply acquired knowledge and learned skills. A weakness was identified in short-term memory which could affect Student’s success in school.

Borderline

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR FUNCTIONING

Acceptable Unacceptable

Intellectual functioning was evaluated using formal measures.  Pertinent findings include the following:  Intellectual functioning appears to be in the average to low average range.   Adaptive behavior was evaluated using informal measures.  Pertinent findings include the following:  Adaptive behavior appears to be age appropriate.   Student's level of intellectual functioning is consistent with his adaptive behavior.

Student is low average.

ACADEMIC FUNCTIONING

Acceptable Unacceptable

Standard scores from the WJ III Ach testing, indicate that Student's standard score is average in math calculation skills when compared to same age peers. His basic reading skills, math reasoning, and written expression scores are in the low average range. His standard scores are low in reading comprehension and reading fluency. His DRA (Developmental Reading Assessment) score from January 2012 is at a level 34 with 78 words per minute. This indicates that he is at about a mid third grade level. Typical 5th graders are reading at a level 50 with 120 words per minute.

Student is weak in reading comprehension and fluency.

CLASSROOM OBSERVATIONS

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student was observed by Mrs. Teacher, special education teacher, on 4/5/12 in his general education classroom.  He was able to appropriately interact with peers and cooperate with teacher requests. He was able to work independently, but often needed to be redirected from socializing with his peers. He responded well to praise and correction, and demonstrated an appropriate activity level.

Student was observed during lunch. No problems were noted.

TEST OBSERVATIONS

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student came with the examiner without hesitation and was easily engaged in conversation. He did not appear to be anxious or uncomfortable with the examiner or with the testing. He appeared alert, maintained adequate attention and concentration skills, and worked to the best of his abilities on the tasks. He followed directions properly and attempted all tasks requested. Student’s effort and perseverance appeared to be appropriate.

Student was active during evaluation.

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY

Acceptable Unacceptable

Student may benefit from assistive technology in the form of text to speech software. It may be beneficial for Student to see and hear the text being read, especially in the content areas of science and social studies.

No AT needs were identified.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Acceptable Unacceptable

In order to be considered as a student with a learning disability, a student must exhibit a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or do mathematical calculations. Student’s cognitive profile does depict a significant weakness in Long Term Retrieval and a normative weakness in Processing Speed. Furthermore, he continues to demonstrate an academic weakness in reading comprehension and reading fluency that is present in standardized testing, TAKS testing, and in the classroom. Therefore, Student does exhibit a pattern of strengths and weaknesses to a degree that she would meet disability criteria for special education as a student with a Specific Learning Disability in the areas of reading comprehension, reading fluency, and written expression.

Student is a student with a learning disability.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Each discipline should write a clear,

concise statement summarizing their findings.

The Final Editor should succinctly reflect the summary in the final paragraph of the Summary and Conclusions section.

CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION CRITERIA

Acceptable Unacceptable

The results of this full and individual evaluation indicate that Student does meet the diagnostic criteria for the following disability condition(s): Specific Learning Disability in the area of Reading Comprehension and Math Reasoning.

Decisions regarding eligibility, educational services, and placement are made by the ARD Committee.

Student is LD.

CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL EDUCATION CRITERIA The Consideration of Special Education

Criteria should clearly reflect what categories of disability, related services, and/or itinerant instructional services have been identified for the ARD Committee to consider when it meets to determine if the student is a student with a disability and in need of special education supports and services.

It is the responsibility of the Final Editor to coordinate with all evaluators to ensure that all categories of disability, related services, and/or itinerant instructional services are documented in this section of the FIE.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Acceptable Unacceptable

Linking new facts to Student’s prior knowledge about the topic may increase inferential comprehension. Using a series of questions, the teacher activates Student's prior knowledge and then models making predictions using a think aloud approach. The KWLS strategy uses a chart to help students organize information into four categories: (1) Know--what they already know about the topic; (2) Want to know--what they want or need to learn from reading; (3) Learned--what they learned from reading; and (4) Still need to learn--what additional information they still need on the topic.

  Various memory strategies that implement

mental imagery are recommended for enhancing vocabulary development. One strategy would teach Student to connect a new vocabulary word with a "keyword" and then to make a mental picture of that keyword. For example, to learn the new word apex, Student can picture an ape sitting on the top of a mountain. Another intervention would teach Student to make mental pictures of what he is reading in addition to carefully studying any visuals included in the text.

Student should receive individual tutoring after school.

SIGNATURE PAGE

Acceptable Unacceptable

All members of the multi-disciplinary team signed the FIE.

Only the OT signed the FIE.

DISABILITY EVALUATION REPORTS The only DER forms that will be

completed this year are the OHI, OI, TBI, or any form that requires a physician’s signature.

The need for any related service or itinerant instructional service will be documented in the Consideration of Special Education Criteria.

Exact wording such as was previously used on the DER should be used in this section.

ACTIVITY: WORDING IN CONSIDERATION OF SPECIAL

EDUCATION CRITERIA SECTION

Materials:Handouts of formerly used

DER forms.

In small groups:Review the old DER.

Discuss how you would summarize the appropriate wording in the appropriate section of the FIE.

Categories of Disability:DER for SLD

DER for ID

DER for AU

DER for ED

DER for SI

DER for NCEC

DER for MD (If student meets criteria for MD it must be documented in the FIE)

Related Service/Itinerant Instructional Services:DER for Related Service

DER for itinerant instructional services (AI/VI/APE)

PRIOR TO FIE GOING HOME Team members should have an

understanding of the download process and agree on where the document is available for review prior to obtaining signatures. Report must be downloaded to ‘S’ drive for review and

edit. The document must be password protected. A log of

student’s names and passwords must be kept by the final editor in a WORD document on their computer.

One team member is the final editor. Team should collaboratively decide who the final

editor will be.

NOTE: Password must be removed by final editor prior to archiving in ARM!

COLLABORATION

It is required that evaluation personnel communicate on a regular basis.

Best practice is to have a regular team meeting time/date which is brief but offers the opportunity to plan for the month.

FINAL EDITOR The final editor is responsible for:

Downloading to ‘S’ drive Ensuring the Consideration for Special Education Criteria

section documents all categories of disability, related service(s), and/or itinerant instructional services that are identified in the FIE.

Final editing for spelling, spacing, grammar and general look of the report including page breaks.

Ensuring that different portions of the report “flow” toward a logical, understandable conclusion.

Adding footer Notifying other team members that FIE is ready for

review. Obtaining signatures prior to sending FIE home. Printing a copy to send to the parents 3 school days

prior to ARD. Reviewing the results with the parent by phone or in

person prior to the ARD.

FINAL EDITOR Only the Final Editor should archive the

report in ARM. What others think is the final copy may

not be the final copy to archive.

FINAL FIE The team lead should communicate throughout

the evaluation process to check with other evaluators on status of the evaluation.

The team lead should communicate with other evaluators on the team and if a section is not finished by due date the lead should contact the campus director for direction on that date.

No unfinished report will be sent home. The discipline that did not finish their section(s)

will be immediately contacted by the campus director and the report will be completed by the ARD date.

=============================================

Each incident of missing initial/re-evaluation timelines must be reported to the campus sp ed Director. The Director will work with the discipline to ensure this does not occur again.

ARD/IEP MEETING ATTENDANCE When the Final Editor reviews the FIE with the

parent they will notify the appropriate discipline of any questions that the parent wants answered prior to the ARD/IEP meeting.

That discipline will contact the parent to answer their questions prior to the ARD/IEP meeting.

If the parents are satisfied then it is not necessary for all disciplines to attend the ARD/IEP meeting.

Therapy should not be dismissed to attend an ARD/IEP meeting if parents are in agreement with evaluation and/or proposed goals/objectives unless parents request they be present. If it is necessary to miss therapy (e.g. to be present at an initial ARD to meet parents), therapy must be made up within same week.

DOWNLOAD AND ARCHIVE The FIE is archived in ARM after the

ARD/IEP meeting at which it is presented.

The final copy of the FIE is deleted from the ‘S’ drive once it is archived in ARM.

NOTE: Password must be removed by final editor prior to archiving in ARM!

=====================================

DO NOT UPLOAD FIE INTO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS. ONLY THE SIGNATURE PAGE IS SCANNED INTO THAT LOCATION.

DATES If an OHI, OI, TBI, etc. DER is reflected in

the FIE it must be dated on or before the FIE date.

For reevaluation the due date should be the earliest date of the evaluations due.

Remember the rule – if an evaluation is due and the FIE is less than 24 months old, the REED/ARD may ask for additional evaluation which will be reported in a FIE Addendum.

When the Triennial FIE is due then all evaluations should be current.

PROBLEM SOLUTION FIE does not reflect

all identified categories of disability, related services, and/or itinerant instructional services.

Final Editor must ensure that all identified categories of disability, related services, and/or itinerant instructional services are reflected in the Consideration for Special Education Criteria section of the FIE.

PASSWORD PROTECTION AND SAVING TO THE ‘S’ NETWORK DRIVE When report is downloaded it will open in WORD. Save the document to the ‘S’ drive so it doesn’t get

lost. Go to office button Go down to prepare Select encrypt document Type in password in box Click ok Reenter password

Now SAVE the document again. Add student name and password to a log.

Log is sent to the discipline secretary at the end of the year.

ACCESSING THE REPORT ON THE ‘S’ DRIVE Go to My Computer and choose ‘S’ drive Choose All Sp Ed Staff Choose SEAS Evaluation Reports Choose school folder Choose student report The file should have been named as

mo/da/yr Student Name FIE or mo/da/yr Student Name Add FIE

Then double-click file to open. Be sure when finished that you save the file

before you close it.

REMOVING PASSWORD PROTECTION AND SAVING TO THE ‘S’ NETWORK DRIVE

Open the document from the ‘S’ drive. Go to ‘office button’ Go down to ‘prepare’ Select ‘encrypt document’ Remove password from password box Click ‘ok’ Now ‘SAVE’ the document again. Now upload the document into ARM.

SIGNATURES Signature page should be a separate

page so that when printed out and scanned it is clear that it is just the signature page for the FIE.

Create the title on signature page as:Signature Page for FIE dated mo/da/yr

PLAN PLAN PLAN – failure to secure a supervisor signature is no excuse to not send FIE home and should be reported to campus Director.

CLUES It is a good idea for the team to agree

on the passwords and someone keep a log of what they are just in case.

It is a good idea for the team to agree that once someone finishes reading the report for the last time, they add their evaluator ID on the signature line.This allows the Final Editor to know when

everyone has reviewed the FIE.

NOTES ABOUT SI ONLY AND SERVICES

Students with a category of disability of speech impairment only may need more than speech therapy.

To identify the need for services, a full comprehensive evaluation must have occurred that identifies in the FIE that the student is a student with a Speech Impairment and in need of additional supports.

A student who has only had a speech evaluation does not have a FIE that would justify additional services.

SIGNATURES A signature page for any FIE evaluating

SLD must contain the special ed and general ed teachers’ signatures and give them the option of agreeing or disagreeing with the report. Use the LISD SLD Assurances narrative to

replace the default assurances/signature page.

Append with the SLD Signature Page after the LISD SLD Assurances narrative.

All other FIE reports will use the assurances that default when you download the report.

If it is known a person is not going to sign the FIE their signature line is removed from the FIE before printing – do not send home a FIE with blank signature lines.

SIGNATURES

Those expecting to sign the FIE must go to the campus where the student is enrolled and sign by the date designated by the Final Editor. If a required signer does not come by due date, the final editor should notify the campus director.

SIGNATURES Team decides which signatures will be on the FIE. The signature page of the FIE is scanned into

SEAS additional documents once the copy is presented to the parent.

The archived copy of the FIE must have the person’s assigned evaluator ID affixed before archiving the report.

All persons involved in the evaluation are expected to sign the FIE.

An AU evaluation requires a LSSP and SLP signature.

If the FIE includes evaluation for SLD a signature from a general education teacher and a special education teacher is also required to be included on the FIE.

The signatures should indicate agreement or disagreement with the FIE.

AI/VI/APE/RELATED SERVICES SIGNATURES

The AI/VI/APE/Related Services personnel are now integrating fully into the FIE.

No separate report will be completed. Related Service/Itinerant staff

conducting evaluations "between" FIEs when the FIE is less than 24 months old will need to put their evaluation findings in a FIE Addendum.

The Related Service/Itinerant staff are responsible for writing the FIE Addendum.

FOOTER Footer is required with student name

and page numbers for FIEStudent name, FIE (or FIE Addendum),

mo/da/yr and page number (# of #)Example: John Doe FIE10/21/09 1 of 27

Open the report in WORD.

Choose ‘Insert’

Select ‘page number’.

Select ‘bottom of page’

Select ‘X of Y’

Cursor will be blinking here

Type Student’s name and hit ‘tab’

Type ‘FIE mo/da/yr’ and hit ‘tab’

Or Type student name, tab, and name it ‘FIE Addendum mo/da/yr’ and tab

Double click on Footer to go back to document

FOOTER WARNING!!! If you do not choose and use the footer

as directed in this training the date will change each time it is opened from the Archived Reports in ARM.

Go to:Page numberSelect bottom of pageSelect X of Y

CAUTION ON DATES Final Editor must ensure that all dates

are consistent:Cover Page dateFooter dateSignature

FIE Addendum is dated the date of the Addendum and not the date of the original FIE. The original FIE date is referenced in the Reason for referral section.

ARD DOCUMENTATION On ARD 1 you still list the dates of the

disciplines that integrated into the FIE:List ED/AU date if LSSP is part of FIEList Speech/Language date if SLP is part of FIEList SLD date if SLD team was part of FIE

Make note in PDS comments that ‘____ report was integrated into FIE of mo/da/yr’

Clerk will enter note in SEAS

REMINDERS: Only use the templates approved for use in

LISD.LISD FIELISD AU FIELISD Homebound FIELISD FIE Addendum

All evaluation personnel should integrate their respective sections into the FIE in the appropriate areas.

Signatures must be obtained and failure to sign by due date established by Final Editor should be reported to campus Director.

TIMELINE REQUIREMENTSInitial Referrals: 60 calendar days from consent to FIE. 30 calendar days from date of FIE to Initial

ARD.

Re-evaluations: REED/ARD establishes timeline – must be

dated on or before 3 year anniversary date. Must be on or before the date established in

the REED/ARD paperwork.

TIMELINE REQUIREMENTSTransfer ARD Evaluations: The previous evaluations must be

reviewed and any new evaluation completed by the 30 school day timeline established by the date of the transfer ARD meeting.

If the previous evaluation is not received within two weeks of the transfer ARD date the new evaluation should be started to ensure it is completed on time.

TIMELINE REQUIREMENTSAdditional evaluations requested by

REED/ARD: Follow the timeline established by the

REED/ARD Committee Generally 30 school days are given for

additional evaluations. If the additional evaluation is for AU

then the timeline should be 45 school days so that the evaluation is appropriately comprehensive.

REFERRALS AT END OF YEAR: If FIE is dated on or before the

last day of the 12-13 school year, an ARD must be held to review the FIE and put in place any services.

This ARD must be held within 30 calendar days of the FIE. Since teachers are off contract the evaluation team should consult with the campus principal to make this happen.

So…If FIE is dated 6/7 or before the

ARD must be held before teachers leave for the summer unless principal’s arrange for the teachers to attend the ARD.

If 60th day after signed consent occurs after the last day of school ,the ARD may be held prior to the first day of school in August. FIE must still be dated by the 60th calendar day following consent for evaluation.

So… If the FIE is dated 6/8 or after the ARD

may be held in August before the first day of school.

The FIE should be archived upon completion.

The FIE date should be entered into Student Information Conference/Dates initial FIE blank.

NOTE: If the student is turning 3 an ARD should be held no later than their 3rd birthday and an IEP must be in place.

Questions???