• Insulin, Diastat, and other Medical Issues
• OSERS Guidance about IEPs &
Assessments
• Audiological Assessments
• Parental Consent
• Mental Health Services for Juvenile Hall
Students
• Revised ADA Regulations: Service
Animals
2

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• June 8, 2010: American Nurses
Association v. O’Connell
• Nursing Practice Act prohibits unlicensed staff from administering insulin to students
• Administration of medication, which includes the injection of insulin, is a function of a licensed nurse under Bus. &
Prof. § 2725
3

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• Current Status:
– California Supreme Court has agreed to review
– Appellate decision stayed until Supreme
Court resolves (potentially 1 1 ½ years)
– AB 1802 (Insulin)
– SB 1051 (Diastat)
4

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• What is the current law?
– Federal
– State
• Who can administer medication to students?
– Parent/guardian or parent/guardian designee
– Student
– Licensed nurse or physician
– Unlicensed voluntary school employee with appropriate training, but only in emergencies
5

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• What forms are needed to administer medication to students?
– IEP, 504 Plan, or Individual Healthcare Plan
– Physician authorization
– Parent authorization
6

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• What is the parent’s obligation?
– Appropriate documentation
– Medication, supplies, and equipment
– Updated information
– Comply with the school policy
• Must the parent release the district from liability?
– No, except student’s self-administering asthma medication and epinephrine
7

Insulin, Diastat,
& other Medical Issues
• What about other medical conditions and medications?
– Asthma, Allergies, Diabetes, and G-Tube
• What about home-hospital programs?
– “Temporary disability”
– In Student v. Los Angeles USD, District not obligated to provide home instruction because no current medical referral
8

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Out-of-State Transfer Students: What if a child with an IEP transfers to a different state and parent refuses to consent to a new evaluation?
9

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Medical Diagnosis: Must the assessments used to determine eligibility, particularly for students with autism or
ADD/ADHD, include a doctor’s medical diagnosis?
10

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Amending IEPs: Who must participate in making changes to the IEP when it is amended without convening an IEP team meeting?
11

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Inviting the Transition Services Agency:
Must a district obtain parental consent to invite a representative of an agency likely to be responsible for transition services to an IEP team meeting?
12

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Mental Health Services: Is the district responsible for paying for mental health services if the IEP team includes these services in the child’s IEP?
13

OSERS Guidance about
IEPs & Assessments
• Postsecondary
Goals: Must an IEP include measurable postsecondary goals based on ageappropriate transition assessments for every
16-year-old student?
14

• In Perusse v. Poway USD, a federal court ruled an audiological assessment not required for a student with an auditory processing deficit
• Why? A school psychologist, speech and language pathologist conducted assessments, and school nurse performed a hearing screening
15

• In Student v. East Whittier City School
Dist. (2010), OAH ruled student received
FAPE despite district’s refusal to conduct a central auditory processing assessment
• Parent’s concerns about student’s progress were not corroborated by teachers or the academic records
16

• AB 1841 conforms state law with federal law by prohibiting districts from initiating a due process hearing if parents revoke consent
• In Student v. Corona-Norco USD (2010),
OAH ruled that a parentally placed private school student was not entitled to related services without consent to the public placement
17

• OAH stated, “While the law permitted them to accept parts of that IEP offer and not others, the [related] services were tied to the public school placement. Student's parents could not accept the services at a different location.”
Student v. Corona-Norco USD (OAH 2010)
18

Mental Health Services for
Juvenile Hall Students
• Student v. Los Angeles USD (OAH 2010)
– 16-year old student, foster child, and a dependent of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles since the age of two
– In juvenile hall, expanded IEP team determines placement in RTC appropriate
• Issue: Which LEA is responsible for RTC placement?
19

Mental Health Services for
Juvenile Hall Students
• OAH declined to rule on the responsibility for
RTC placement
• Student still in juvenile hall at the time of hearing, responsibility remains with LACOE
• LACOE must implement placement and may seek reimbursement from responsible LEA or state agency
• BUT OAH did not identify the LEA responsible post-release
Student v. Los Angeles USD (OAH 2010)
20

Mental Health Services for
Juvenile Hall Students
• Senate Bill 1059 (“SB 1059”)
• Amends Education Code § 48645.2 and
56028
• Clarifies which LEA is responsible for juvenile hall student placed in an RTC by his/her expanded IEP team
• Vetoed by Governor on September 30 due to “pending litigation”
21

• County Office of Education in which juvenile court school is located must identify the LEA responsible for the RTC placement
• Responsible LEA based on:
– Whether or not student has a “parent”
– In-State vs. Out-of-State Placement
22

• Students who have a “parent,” as defined by EC § 56028(a)(1) & (a)(4)
– Biological, adoptive parent, legal guardian
– Individual acting in place of parent

• Responsible LEA = The school district where the parents or legal guardian resides
23

• Different standard for “parentless” students, defined as students with
– “Foster parent” – EC § 56028(a)(2)
– “Surrogate parent” – EC § 56028(a)(5)
– “Responsible adult” – Welfare & Institutions
Code § 361 & 726
24

“Parentless”
Juvenile Hall Students
RESPONSIBLE LEA (SB
1059)
IN-STATE RTC OUT-OF-STATE RTC
School district in which RTC is located
Last school district at which pupil was enrolled prior to placement in juvenile hall.
25

• Other effects of SB 1059
– Clarifies existing law regarding responsibility for residential placement
– Amends Section 56028(b) to state that residence of a surrogate parent or responsible adult will NOT determine district of residence responsible for student
26

• Passed by California Legislature
August 19, 2010
• Enrolled and sent to Governor for signature on September 2, 2010
• If signed, effective January 1, 2011
27

Revised ADA Regulations
Service Animals
• Effective March 15, 2011
• Require public entities, including K-12 school districts, to allow service dogs on campus
• Schools must modify policies and practices accordingly for students, school staff, and visitors
(28 C.F.R § 35.136.)
28

Revised ADA Regulations
Service Animals
• “Service animal” definition
– “Any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability.”
(28 C.F.R. § 35.104.)
• Includes miniature horses in limited circumstances
29

Revised ADA Regulations
Service Animals
• May inquire
(1) whether the animal is required because of a disability; and
(2) what work or task the animal has been trained to perform
• May ask individual to remove if animal is out of control or not housebroken
• Cannot inquire about the nature or extent of disability or require documentation of animal’s service training
30

• The California Supreme Court has reinstated the Governor’s furlough order
• As a result OAH will be closed on the 2 nd ,
3 rd and 4 th Fridays of the month
31

32

S.F. lawyer accused of fraud in autism care
• Trust, but verify
• Yes, it is true sometimes parents cheat
33

Q & A
34

35