Islets of Hope

islets of hope home buttonabout type 1 diabetes buttonabout type 2 diabetes buttoncomplications with diabetes buttondiabetes support groups buttondiabetes resourcesbutton for diabetes laws and statutes

diabetes and school, education, day care facilities
 Click to visit Education


Fast Click to Diabetes Legal Information

Federal & State Laws Protecting Children & Adults with Diabetes in:

Public Schools
Private Schools
Day Care Centers
Colleges & Universities
Workplace

Other Legal Information

Diabetes Discrimination & Legal Resources

Insurance Laws

Laws & Policies for Traveling with Diabetes

Diabetes Legal Headline News

Research & Ethics Laws


Have a question about diabetes discrimination?

Post your question to IOH's "Ask the Lawyer" Jeffrey I. Ehrlich; father of a child with type 1 diabetes, and an appellate attorney specializing in diabetes discrimination legal issues.


UNPRECEDENTED CLASS ACTION CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT

Children with Diabetes Sues CA School Districts for Denial of Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Administration At Schools

“(OCTOBER 11, 2005, Oakland, CA) - Four elementary school-age students, along with the American Diabetes Association, filed an unprecedented civil rights complaint today in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California seeking class action relief against the California Superintendent of Public Schools, the California Department of Education, members of the California Board of Education, the San Ramon Valley Unified School District, the Fremont Unified School District, and their Superintendents and Boards of Trustees. The suit asks the Court to compel public school officials to comply with federal law by providing the assistance that California students with diabetes require to manage their diabetes during the school day.

"The complaint alleges that the state and the local districts violate Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504), the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and applicable federal regulations in their failure to ensure the health and safety of public school students with diabetes in Kindergarten through 12th Grade by providing insulin administration, blood glucose monitoring, proper care in emergency situations, and other appropriate diabetes care.”

For more information, contact:

Julia Epstein, Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, (510) 644-2555 (x. 241)
Peter Greenley, Reed Smith LLP, (415) 659-5669
Zach Goldberg, American Diabetes Association, (703) 549-1500 (x. 2622)

 

diabetes legal information education and daycare facility laws

U.S. Department of Education - Print this page (word document)
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
2004 Reauthorization Statute

Individualized Education Program (IEP)
Statewide and District Assessments


Also, see Individualized Education Program (IEP) Content

The reauthorized Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) was signed into law on Dec. 3, 2004 by President George W. Bush.  The provisions of the act became effective on July 1, 2005, with the exception of some of the elements pertaining to the definition of a “highly qualified teacher” that took effect upon the signing of the act.  This is one in a series of documents, prepared by the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS) in the U.S. Department of Education, that covers a variety of high-interest topics and brings together the statutory language related to those topics to support constituents in preparing to implement the new requirements.(1)  This document addresses only the changes to the IDEA provisions regarding statewide and districtwide assessments that took effect on July 1, 2005.  It does not address any changes that may be made by the final regulations.

IDEA 2004:

1.  Removes the IDEA’s reference to “modifications in administration” regarding the assessment of children’s academic achievement and functional performance.

An individualized education program (IEP) must include a statement of any “appropriate accommodations that are necessary to measure the academic achievement and functional performance of the child,” rather than a statement of individual modifications in the administration of state or districtwide student assessments.  [612(d)(1)(A)(VI)(aa) of IDEA]

2.  Adds a reference to No Child Left Behind (NCLB).

All children with disabilities are included in all general state and districtwide assessment programs, including assessments described under Section 1111 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965(2), with appropriate accommodations and alternate assessments where necessary and as indicated in their respective individualized education programs (IEPs).   [612(a)(16)(A) of IDEA]

3.  Adds specific requirements for state guidelines regarding alternate assessments.

State (or, in the case of a districtwide assessment, the local education agency (LEA)) guidelines developed and implemented under Section 612(a)(16)(c)(i) of IDEA must provide for alternate assessments that:

  • Are aligned with the state's challenging academic content standards and challenging student academic achievement standards; and
  • If the state has adopted alternate academic achievement standards permitted under the regulations promulgated to carry out Section 1111(b)(1) of the ESEA, measure the achievement of children with disabilities against those standards.

The state conducts the alternate assessments described above.  [612(a)(16)(C)(ii), (iii) of IDEA]

4.  Expands requirements for reporting.

The state education agency (SEA) (or, in the case of a districtwide assessment, the LEA) makes available to the public and reports to the public with the same frequency and in the same detail as it reports on the assessment of nondisabled children, the following:

  • The numbers of children with disabilities participating in regular assessments, and the number of those children who were provided accommodations in order to participate in those assessments;
  • The number of children with disabilities participating in alternate assessments that are aligned with the state’s challenging academic content standards and challenging student academic achievement standards; and the number of children with disabilities participating in alternate assessments aligned with alternate achievement standards; and
  • The performance of children with disabilities on regular assessments and on alternate assessments (if the number of children with disabilities participating in those assessments is sufficient to yield statistically reliable information and reporting that information will not reveal personally identifiable information about an individual student), compared with the achievement of all children, including children with disabilities, on those assessments.

[612(a)(16)(D) of IDEA]

5.  Includes changes to the individualized education program (IEP).

The IEP must include the following:

  • For children with disabilities who take alternate assessments aligned to alternate achievement standards, a description of benchmarks or short-term objectives (within the required statement of a child’s present levels of academic achievement and functional performance);
  • A statement of any individual appropriate accommodations that are necessary to measure the academic achievement and functional performance of the child on state and districtwide assessments consistent with Section 612(a)(16)(A) of IDEA; and
  • If the IEP team determines that the child shall take an alternate assessment on a particular state or districtwide assessment of student achievement, a statement of why the child cannot participate in the regular assessment, and the particular alternate assessment selected is appropriate for the child.

[614(d)(1)(A)(i)(I)(cc), (VI)(aa)-(bb) of IDEA]


(1) Topics in this series include:  Alignment With the No Child Left Behind Act; Changes in Initial Evaluation and Reevaluation; Children Enrolled by Their Parents in Private Schools; Discipline; Disproportionality and Overidentification; Early Intervening Services; Highly Qualified Teachers; Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team Meetings and Changes to the IEP; Individualized Education Program (IEP); Local Funding; National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard (NIMAS); Part C Amendments in IDEA 2004; Part C Option: Age 3 to Kindergarten Age; Procedural Safeguards: Surrogates, Notice and Consent; Procedural Safeguards: Mediation and Resolution Sessions; Procedural Safeguards: Due Process Hearings; Secondary Transition; State Funding; and Statewide and Districtwide Assessments.  Documents are available on the OSERS Web site at: www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/osers/index.html.


(2)
For purposes of this document, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) is referred to as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965, as amended.

 

   

 

Contact Us  |  About IOH  |  Our Mission  |  Elizabeth's Story  |  About the Founder  |  Join IOH  |  How To Help  |  Advertise  |  Privacy Statement  |  Site Index  |

Page Updated 03/06/2006