Oregon Department of EducationOffice of Student Learning & Partnerships

255 Capitol Street NE

Salem, OR97310-0203

2009-2010 ECSE: Individual Procedural Compliance Review (PCR) Form

Overview

1. It is important to note that this form does not contain all of the requirements within IDEA or OARs, but is used to monitor compliance as one part of the state’s general supervision responsibilities. Beyond the content of this form, programs are responsible for compliance with all of the regulations within IDEA and state OARs for children with disabilities.

2. This document contains selected standards, file review guidance to help ensure consistent understanding and application of the standards, and federal and state citations.

3. For the purposes of this review, standards are grouped in the following categories:

I. Procedural Safeguards / VI. IFSP Content
II. ECSE Evaluation / VII. Revisions to IFSP
III. ECSE Eligibility / VIII. IFSP Timelines
IV. IFSP Meeting Notice / IX. Progress Reporting
V. IFSP Team Members / X. Least Restrictive Environment

Reviewing and Recording PCR Data

1. Begin by locking in your children through SPR&I, be sure to only lock in children that are still IDEA eligible and currently being served by your

program.

2. Once a child is locked in through SPR&I, print a blank file review form for that child using the print function. This blank form will have the child’s

SSID on it and will contain only those standards that apply to the child based on the information you provided during the lock in process.

3. For each standard on the file review form:

A. Read the standard

B. Review the guidance included below the standard.

C. Locate the required information and document(s) in the child’s file and review according to guidance.

D. Rate each standard by filling in the circle next to the appropriate response:

OYes (Meets Requirement) O No (Does Not Meet Requirement) O N/A (Not Applicable)

4. Comment Section:

The reviewer must include an explanatory comment for every standard identified as “No” or “N/A.”

Caution: Some standards require reviewing the INITIAL or MOST RECENT document.

Corrective Action Guide (CAG)

Noncompliance must always be corrected at the individual file level whenever possible. However, some standards cannot be corrected due to the nature of the standard (e.g., missed timelines) and therefore require additional files to be reviewed to establish evidence of correction/compliance with the ODE. In addition to whether a standard can be corrected at the individual file level or requires additional files to be reviewed, issues of non-systemic versus systemic noncompliance also need to be considered when correcting noncompliance.

In the case of non-systemic noncompliance (<33% of files show noncompliance for any single standard) the ODE requires LEAs to:

  • For standards that can be corrected at the individual file level, report the required action and the date it was corrected in SPR&I;
  • For standards that cannot be corrected at the individual file level, review an additional number of files[1] equal to 50% of the original number of files reviewed (round up in the case of an odd number) and report in SPR&I the SSID and compliance status for each additional file reviewed.

If after completing the additional file review, further noncompliance is identified the LEA will need to:

  • Conduct localized training on the standard and document in SPR&I the activities and staff involved in the training; and
  • Conduct a third review of files (50% of the original number reviewed) on the same standard after the localized training, and
  • Report on the number of files that are compliant (must be 100% for the ODE to sign off on the correction).

In the case of systemic noncompliance (>33% of files out on any single standard), the ODE requires LEAs to:

  • For standards that can be corrected at the individual file level, report the required action and the date it was corrected in SPR&I;
  • Conduct program-wide training on the noncompliance and document in SPR&I the activities and staff involved in the training; and
  • Conduct a second review of files (50% of the original number reviewed) on the same standard after the program-wide training; and
  • Report on the program-wide training content, attendees, and date of training; and
  • Report the number of files that are compliant (must be 100% of files reviewed after the training for the ODE to sign off on the correction).

How to Read this Form:

I. Procedural Safeguards / Comments/Corrective Action
Item # and response choices listed here:
300
O Yes
O No
For some items, it is required that you enter the date of the item. For these items, when you answer “Yes” you will need to enter the date of the document in the comment section. / The item to review will be listed here. / This area is for clarifying comments for those items you answer “No” or “NA” or which may require additional documentation to substantiate compliance.
Date of
Initial:
Provide date of document you are using here if requested. If you need to enter additional information here on the SPR&I site, save your answer, go back to the comment and add information after the date, then save your answer again.
The item # the Guidance refers to will be listed here:
300 / Guidance, if any, for the item above will be listed here. / The required corrective action for items that are noncompliant will be listed here.

ECSE

List the child’s SSID
List the child’s name / First: / Last:
List the child’s date of birth / ___/___/_____
List the child’s ethnicity / Asian / Black / Caucasian / Hispanic / Native American
List the child’s primary disability
List the child’s most recent IFSP Date / ___/___/_____
List the child’s initial IFSP date / ___/___/_____
Date of ECSEeligibility / ___/___/_____
Did the program establish eligibility? / Yes No
Has the child been reevaluated since initial eligibility, if yes, When? / Yes No
___/___/_____

Eligibility and Census Verification: P.L. 108-446, OAR 581-015-2010(Census and Data Reporting); (34 CFR 300.13 (FAPE); (34 CFR 300.26) (Special Education)

Eligibility and Census Verification / Comments/Corrective Action
O Yes
O No
O NA / The child file being reviewed includes:
  • Documentation that the child was enrolled in the program on December 1st of the census review year; and
  • A statement of eligibility signed by an Eligibility Team which was in effect on December 1st of the census review year; and
  • An Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) which was in effect on December1st of the census review year; and,
  • The IFSP in effect on December 1st of the census review year contains specially designed instruction.
Mark NA if the child entered the program after December 1st of the census year and proceed with the file review.
If the child was in the program prior to 12/1 but had a lapsed IFSP on 12/1 mark “No” and the file should not be reviewed - an alternate file should be selected for review. Also, please email your CountyContact as soon as possible so that any necessary corrections to the SECC can be made.
Guidance / This question is for tracking purposes only; it is not a compliance question. The file review can continue with the selected file as long as the file has not lapsed.
A. There must be a statement of eligibility, signed by the eligibility team, in effect on December 1 of the identified census year.
  • Check the child’s educational record for this document.
B. There must be an IFSP in the child’s educational record that was in effect on December 1 of the identified census year.
  • Check the child’s educational records for this document.
C.A child’s IFSP must contain specially designed instruction.
  • Check the service summary on the child’s IFSP for documentation of specially designed instruction.
D.The child was enrolled in the program on December 1st of the special education census year reviewed.
  • Check the child’s educational records for documentation that the child was enrolled in the program on December 1st. Examples of documents that satisfy proof of enrollment include dates of IFSP meetings, notes from service providers, and child performance data.
Documentation for childrenenrolled in the program but receiving services outside the program may include:
Interdistrict Agreements, contact logs, and attendance reports from service providers (e.g., state or regional programs). / None


I. Procedural Safeguards P.L.108-446;OAR 581-015-2315; (34 CFR 300.504) (Notice of Procedural Safeguards); (34 CFR 300.300, 34 CFR 300.304, 34 CFR 300.505) (Parental Consent); OAR 581-015-2745; (34 CFR 300.503, 34 CFR 303.401, 34 CFR 303.403, 34 CFR 303.404) (Prior Notice/Procedural safeguards).

I. Procedural Safeguards / Comments/Corrective Action
300
O Yes
O No / The Program provided Procedural Safeguards to the parents upon initial referral or parent requestfor evaluation, when requested by a parent, and at least once annually. §300.504 / Date of Initial:
Date of Annual:
Guidance
300 / Provide date of initial and Annual notice in the comments section. Check the referral form or referral team notes for documentation that the parent was given a copy of the Procedural Safeguards at the time of the referral for evaluation and at the most recent annual IFSP or at least once in the past year. Give the dates of the initial referral and the current annual IFSP and confirm Procedural Safeguards were made available for both of these.
Transfer Children: For children who move into the program with established IDEA eligibility, but without documented evidence in their file that procedural safeguards parents at the time of the initial referral: check forevidence that parents have received a copy of procedural safeguards since the time of initial referral. If no evidence since the initial referral, provide a copy. In the comments, describe and explain the conditions which led to the missing procedural safeguards notice. If the program identifies the point of referral as the time of consent for evaluation, check to ensure that Procedural Safeguards were provided at the time of the consent for evaluation. / Send Procedural Safeguards to parents immediately. Include date safeguards were provided to parents in SPR&I.
301
O Yes
O No / Use the most recent Prior Written Notice in the child’s file. Include the date of this notice in the initial questions on the file review form and list the type of Prior Written Notice in the comments section.
The Program gave prior written notice to the parent within a reasonable time before the program:
1) Proposed To Conduct anevaluation or reevaluation (Type 1);
2) ProposedPlacement (Type 2);
3) Proposes To initiate or change the identification, evaluation, placement or provision of FAPE (Type 3); or
4) Refuses to initiate or change identification, evaluation, placement, or provision of FAPE (Type 4).
5) The most recent prior written notice selected met the content requirements by including:
a)A description of the action proposed or refused;
b)An explanation of why the action was proposed or refused;
c)A description of any options considered;
d)The reasons these options were rejected;
e)A description of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report used as a basis for the proposal or refusal;
f)A description of any other factors relevant to the proposal or refusal;
g)A statement that parents of a child with a disability have protection under Procedural Safeguards and the means by which a copy of the notice of Procedural Safeguards may be obtained;
h)Sources for parents to contact to obtain assistance in understanding their Procedural Safeguards;
i)Written in a language understandable to the general public;
j)Provided in the native language of the parent or other mode of communication used by the parent unless it is clearly not feasible to do so; and,
k)If the native language or other mode of communication used by the parent is not a written language:
  • Reasonable effort was made to aid the parent in understanding the content of the notice; and,
  • There is written evidence that the requirements in this section have been met. §300.503
/ Date of Notice:
Type of Notice:
Guidance
301 / Provide the date of notice and the type of notice in the comments section. Prior Written Notice is given to the parent before a program proposes to initiate or change, or refuses to initiate or change, the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free, appropriate, public education to the child.
  • Check the child’s records for the most recent prior written notice:
  • Compare the dates of notice with the dates of implementation for any change in the identification, reevaluation, placement, or provision of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). All notices must meet this standard.
  • Look for a Prior Written Notice if the team determines a new eligibility, changes eligibility categories or refuses an eligibility category requested by the parent.
  • Look for a Prior Written Notice (with consent) if the program initiates an evaluation or reevaluation, or refuses an evaluation or reevaluation requested by the parent.
  • Look for a Prior Written Notice if the team determines initial placement (with consent), changes placement, or refuses a placement requested by the parent.
  • Look for a Prior Written Notice if the team initiates a change in the IFSP that would be considered a change in the provision of FAPE to a child (e.g. adds a new service, discontinues a services, or makes another change) or refuses to make such a change requested by the parent.
The Prior Written Notice mustinclude:
  • A statement that parents of a child with a disability have protection under Procedural Safeguards and the means by which a copy of the notice of Procedural Safeguards may be obtained;
  • Sources for the parent to contact to obtain assistance in understanding their procedural safeguards.
The Prior Written Notice must be written:
  • In a language understandable to the general public.
  • Notice content should be clearly understandable to the parent. Check the notice to ensure that content is free of jargon, acronyms, test scores and/or technical language without explanation.
  • In the native language of the parent or other mode of communication used by the parent unless it is clearly not feasible to do so.
  • Check the child’s records for any evidence of a native language other than English. If the native language is other than English, look for the notice provided in the native languageIf the native language or other mode of communication used by the parent is not a written language:
I. The Procedural Safeguards are translated orally or by other means to the parent in the parent’s native language or
other mode of communication;
II. Reasonable effort is made to aid the parent in understanding the content of the notice; and,
III. There is written evidence in the child’s file that the requirements in this section have been met. / Review additional files. (50% of the original number reviewed) and list the SSID and compliance status for each file in SPR&I.
If this was a translation issue, provide translated prior written notice to parents
302
O Yes
O No / Written parental consent obtained prior to initial evaluation or reevaluation of the child or, if no consent was obtained for reevaluation, documentation of reasonable measures to obtain consent is evident. §300.300 / Date of Consent:
Guidance
302 / Provide the date of consent in the comments section. Apply the following standards to the most recent consent for evaluation:
  • Check the child file for documentation of written Parental Consent for initial evaluation and/or reevaluation.
  • Check the date on the Consent for initial evaluation or reevaluation against the date(s) of the evaluation(s) to ensure that consent was obtained prior to the evaluation.
  • Programs must obtain consent for any new testing completed as part of an evaluation/reevaluation. New testing can only be conducted without written Parental Consent if consent was requested and the parent failed to respond. Parent consent MUST ALWAYS be obtained for any test of intelligence or for tests of personality.
  • If no written consent for evaluation/reevaluation can be found, check for documentation of reasonable efforts to obtain written consent. Reasonable efforts include records of telephone calls and the results of those calls, copies of correspondence and any response received, copies of consent documents sent to the parents and responses received, and records of visits made to the parent’s home or workplace and the results of those visits.
/ Review additional files. (50% of the original number reviewed) and list the SSID and compliance status for each file in SPR&I.
303
O Yes
O No / Written notice and consent for initial and reevaluation includes a description of each evaluation procedure, test, record, or report. §300.304
Guidance
303 / Apply to the initial consent and themost recentreevaluation.The notice and consent for evaluation form must list the specific evaluation procedures, assessments or tests the team plans to use. The assessment name and a brief description of the assessment must be included. This information may be contained on another form and clearly referenced on the consent form. If this is the case, the form should be attached to the consent form / Review additional files. (50% of the original number reviewed) and list the SSID and compliance status for each file in SPR&I.
304
O Yes
O No
O NA / Written parental consent obtained for administration of IQ or personality tests. OAR 581-021-0030 / Date ofConsent:
Guidance
304 / Provide date of consent. Oregon law requires written consent for Intelligence and personality testing before the test administration. Compare the consent date and the test administration date(s) to verify prior consent.
Check the child’s file. If individual intelligence tests and/or tests of personality were administered, check for documentation of prior written parental consent. Reasonable “efforts” to obtain consent do not justify administration of these tests without written consent. / Review additional files. (50% of the original number reviewed) and list the SSID and compliance status for each file in SPR&I
305
O Yes
O No / Written parental consent obtained prior to placement in special education. §300.300 / Date of Consent:
Guidance
305 / Provide date of consent. Check the child file for documentation of consent for initial provision of special education. Check the date of consent against the start date of the IFSP to ensure consent was obtained prior to the provision of services. / Get consent from parent and date it when received, do not back date consent. Include date consent was received in SPR&I.

II. Evaluation: P.L. 108-446; OAR 581-015-2105 (34 CR 300.300, §§300.301, 300.304, 300.305), (Evaluation/Revaluation); (34 CFR 300.305) (Evaluation Planning) (34 CFR 300.11) (School day definition.)