Does your IEP grid use the words "Sped Staff" under Type of Personnel? I am currently reading through three (3) separate IEPs that use this term to describe the Personnel in the Grid. Despite PQA finding a District in noncompliance for using this term in 2013 (!), Districts are still attempting to use this in IEPs. (Examples below)
PQA ruled that this is in violation of 603 CMR 28.06(2)(a) and stated that "the term SPED Staff is not sufficient to describe the types of personnel required on the IEP service delivery grid." PQA directed the District to refrain from using the term sped staff and that each IEP should identify the type of service providers, e.g., special education teacher, paraprofessional, Occupational Therapist, etc.
CMR 28.06(2)(a) requires an IEP Team to consider "the types of service providers." In order for an IEP Team to make a reasonable decision regarding a student's placement, the IEP Team (and this includes, YOU, the parent!) must have some knowledge of the kinds of service providers who will provide the student services. PRS stated, “In the same manner which the IEP Team must distinguish between the types of related services necessary for the student (for example, "speech Therapy" or "Physical Therapy") in making its placement decision, the regulation requires the same sort of consideration for distinguishing the student's service providers.” "SPED Staff is not sufficient to describe the types of personnel required on the IEP service delivery grid. PQA ordered the District to send a memo to the IEP Team Chairpersons stating that the use of term "SPED Staff' on the IEP service delivery grid is not acceptable and that each IEP should identify the type of service providers, e.g., special education teacher, paraprofessional, Occupational Therapist, etc.
Parents - your child’s IEP depends on the specificity of the language. How can you provide informed consent if you do not understand what you, the most important member of the team, are consenting to in the IEP? Details and language matter! When reading through your child’s IEP, go through the language in the document word for word. If you interpret the language one way, the likelihood is that someone else will interpret the language another way. When reading an IEP, a Hearing Officer found that the sentence, “rules-based reading with one-to-one instruction” did not equate to the interpretation proposed by the Parent that the child’s systematic reading instruction be delivered only in a one-to-one setting. Rather, the Hearing Officer found that the IEP language was inclusive and should be read broadly to permit flexibility in selecting the appropriate setting for the delivery of services.