NASN: Role of the SChool Nurse on the 504 Team

Author:
Updated:
Original:

[url="http://www.nasn.org/Default.aspx?tabid=280"]http://www.nasn.org/Default.aspx?tabid=280[/url]

excerpt:

[i][b]THE ROLE OF THE SCHOOL NURSE[/b]

The professional school nurse is an integral member of the 504 team. The school nurse routinely identifies students with physical or mental disabilities and notifies the school that certain students may require accommodations or other services under Section 504. The school nurse is the professional who gathers and interprets health information and who therefore, has the most information about students

On Feb 1, 2006

From the website:

"Many districts consider the IHP to be a 504 Plan in the cases where a student needs only the health-related accommodations outlined in the IHP to access education. The IHP then, is subject to the regulations of Section 504. Therefore, once the 504 team has determined eligibility for an individual student, the team then can determine whether academic accommodations are also needed for the student to access education. If classroom or academic accommodations are needed, then those accommodations can be written as the 504 Plan and the IHP can then be added to the 504 Plan as an accommodation."

This really confuses me. I thought once academic accommodations were needed then an IEP was needed...I thought the 504 was specifically for "health-related" accommodations.

Am I reading this wrong or misunderstanding the theory here?? An IHP does not give you the same protection as a 504...right?

Donna

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b] This really confuses me. I thought once academic accommodations were needed then an IEP was needed...I thought the 504 was specifically for "health-related" accommodations.

[/b]

My cubs Life Threatening Food Allergies and Asthma are accommodated and addressed under the qualifying criteria of [b]"Other [i]Health[/i] Impairment"[/b] in an [b]IEP[/b] through IDEA.

I reraised this thread

[url="http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000966.html"]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000966.html[/url]

to compliment this discussion and in particular, this post from it (February 1):

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [url="http://www.nasn.org/briefs/idea.htm"]http://www.nasn.org/briefs/idea.htm[/url] Link to:

"National Association of School Nurses

ISSUE BRIEF School Health Nursing Services Role in Health Care"

entitled:

[i]"School Nurses and the [b]Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)"[/b][/i]

Disclaimer: just posting a link for discussion, and am not offering advice in any manner or form.

Link to separate post: [url="http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000989.html"]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/000989.html[/url]

I would hate to be dismissive of IEP's and OHI as a potential method of addressing LTFA. What do I know.

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. Just speaking personally.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]From the website:

[i]"Many districts consider the IHP to be a 504 Plan in the cases where a student needs only the health-related accommodations outlined in the IHP to access education. The IHP then, is subject to the regulations of Section 504. Therefore, once the 504 team has determined eligibility for an individual student, the team then can determine whether academic accommodations are also needed for the student to access education. If classroom or academic accommodations are needed, then those accommodations can be written as the 504 Plan and the IHP can then be added to the 504 Plan as an accommodation."[/i]

This really confuses me. I thought once academic accommodations were needed then an IEP was needed...I thought the 504 was specifically for "health-related" accommodations.

Am I reading this wrong or misunderstanding the theory here?? An IHP does not give you the same protection as a 504...right?

Donna[/b]

It is confusing. I'll share my interpretation, and hope others will too...

When we requested a 504 designation, the eligibility Team was instructed to consider eligibility under IDEA (an IEP) as well. It was stated that this was part of their remit. I think you're right that the passage should have probably stated:

[i]"If classroom or academic accommodations are needed, then those accommodations can be written as the 504 Plan [b]or IEP[/b] and the IHP can then be added to the as an accommodation."[/i]

You are correct that an IHP does not give you the same protection as a 504. Both are considered legally binding documents, but the 504 gives your child more protection under the law because you have specific rights granted to you including the right for your child to be "educated with non-disabled students to the maximum extent appropriate".

When my DD had an IHP without the 504 designation, the school nurse segregated my DD in order to keep her safe. An example was that they provided her with a PF cafeteria table but the table was different and because it was smaller it did not allow her to be with her non-disabled peers. When she was given the 504 designation, it was clear that legally she was entitled to more accommodations that would allow her sit at the "regular" table.

Currently our 504 plan includes an IHP as one, primary component. There are additional components, a worksheet that the school counselor fills out for school activities for example, that are assigned to other staff members. But the main difference now is that the 504 plan is administered by the school counselor, not the school nurse as was the case with our IHP.

So I'd say our 504 plan includes more than "health-related" accommodations. DD hasn't had an anaphylactic reaction at school, so the "health related" accommodations have been successful. But in the past those came at the expense of her "social", "emotional", "behavioral". Other goals/outcomes are addressed in her 504 plan now. Issues such as "self-advocacy" are included in her plan.

BTW, I remember there was a poster her a while back (Janet Laflamme, I think) who had an IHP with a box at the top that indicated her child was protected under Section 504. But the document itself was an IHP administered by the school nurse.

I look forward to MommaBear's opinion. I suspect that she would put forth that learning is always necessarily impacted.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b]I look forward to MommaBear's opinion. I suspect that she would put forth that learning is always necessarily impacted. [/b]

You got here first! LOL! I'm too slow MB!

On Feb 1, 2006

I understand what you are saying, but I still don't understand specifically how they can say an IHP is the same as a 504. We all know they are different of the reasons already given.

An IHP can be incorporated into a 504 plan...but that does not make an IHP by itself the same as a 504.

I would not have a problem with and IEP with an OHI designation...that to me is even better than a 504, but unlikely because my son does not have academic weaknesses. IEPs are generally to cover academic accommodations.

To restate:

"Many districts consider the IHP to be a 504 Plan in the cases where a student needs only the health-related accommodations outlined in the IHP to access education. The IHP then, is subject to the regulations of Section 504."

I don't understand how they can state that and IHP is subject to the regulation of a 504, UNLESS it is incorporated into a 504, but standing alone it is not the same.

Maybe I am getting too detailed. But I would hate for those responsible for taking care of our children to be given incorrect information...and therefore making it harder for us to get the 504 designation.

I don't want an IHP...I either want an IEP with OHI or a 504.

Still confused....

Donna

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b] I would not have a problem with and IEP with an OHI designation...that to me is even better than a 504, but unlikely because my son does not have academic weaknesses. IEPs are generally to cover academic accommodations.

[/b]

warning: i have a big blue question mark above this post. It means, I don't know, I'm asking a question, I'm not sure, etc.....

Personally? I don't think one has to have an "academic weakness" to qualify for an OHI designation. Would only "learning" being affected by a disability be enough? Wouldn't a limitation of not having access to education (in this case [i]safe access[/i] due to a life threatening disability) need apply?

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm under the impression that it is the obligation of a school district to prohibit attendance when the environment is [i]unsafe[/i] and make changes, [i]improvements[/i], repairs, or accommodations as necessary (homebound option if need be?) in order that access be provided.

And *that* if "learning is affected", and an IEP being the most [i]appropriate[/i] designation in such circumstances, yea...............if the condition could be addressed by either a 504 or an IEP, that the district would have the *right* to demand it be addressed under [i]an IEP[/i].

Possibly, even go to due process, (or as I was told on *another* IEP issue "state mediated intervention" not sure what that is or if it exists---not sure if it was done in the best interest of the child---or was a hollow threat???) ) to get a designation and documentation in order that needs be met....

....Needs of the district in order to provide for that child, and needs of child, in order that their best interests be determined and served [i]appropriately[/i], or limits and burden of obligation (or not) be determined, met, and resolved. I mean, where "Duty of Care" resides. That depending on the situation (or not) who needs to do what and where and when.

Tangent warning: I mean, as far as a districting possibly demanding an IEP over a 504 as being most appropriate, what is the argument for not allowing "privately schooled" persons to forgo the obligation of being taxed for "public schooling"? That society has an obligation to maintain school systems for *everyone*?? Sure, someone may [i]prefer[/i] a different designation, but what about the Big Picuture? Does every little bit that is provided under certain designations such as an IEP help the [i]maintain[/i] the school system in general? Not even sure how much money is provided to districts under IEP's, but I've been told there's a lot States don't use and send back every year. and I could have been told wrong. heard wrong. (where's that link to the money that school districts don't use each year???) And I've been told IEP funding is not that much. But hey, it's [i]something[/i]. (and I could be wrong there too. I mean, on what I've been told)

Odd, considering the increasing need for "individualization" and some school districts crying "poor mouth". Maybe it's not just the schools who are contributing to perpetuating this happenstance. If it exists.

What if everyone decided they didn't want cerain "labels" but wanted the accomodation? Or even just some. KWIM?

SOMEBODY. HELP ME. AM I WAY OFF? DO I MISUNDERSTAND???

Don't take this as advice, it's not meant that way. I am unsure.

[i]I am not offering advice in any manner or form. I am not qualified nor do I understand these things in such a way that I could offer advice. I'm only asking. I don't know. This is just my limited understanding, if I understand at all. [/i]

[This message has been edited by MommaBear (edited February 01, 2006).]

On Feb 1, 2006

oh, and my post might be a "U.S." thing. Who knows.

On Feb 1, 2006

From Allergysupport.org:

If a particular disability does not affect a child

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]Is there a reason a parent would not want IEP if that is how the school wants to handle it?[/b]

I can't think of a reason. If my school district would have offered me an IEP for her PA, I would have gladly accepted it. (BTW, my PA DD has an IEP for her learning disability and a 504 plan for her PA.)

I think that, in general, it's harder to make the case for an IEP for a child w/ PA. But hey, MommaBear did it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]From Allergysupport.org:

If a particular disability does not affect a child

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] I think that, in general, it's harder to make the case for an IEP for a child w/ PA. But hey, MommaBear did it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img][/b]

but why should it be harder? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]

I'm not going to take complete credit for getting the IEP/OHI designation. I mean, [i]my district superintendent[/i] suggested it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img] Who, by the way, was new in "town". I mean, he was the new "Superintendent" of our district. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]

On Feb 1, 2006

Does he have asthma?

On Feb 1, 2006

gailw....just a note:

[i]I intend to follow up on "monitorable, measureable, achievable, documentable" goals on the IEP next school year.[/i]

I mean, that's one of the 'perks', right?

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b] but why should it be harder? [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img][/b]

The "academic performance" of most children with PA (who attend school) isn't adversely affected by their PA. I think it's harder to make a case for OHI because (generally speaking) children with PA attending school don't have "record" of their "academic performance" adversely affected by their PA.

What "criteria" or hard data would you use, MommaBear, that would support a OHI designation for a PA child who is doing well academically in school?

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b]gailw....just a note:

[i]I intend to follow up on "monitorable, measureable, achievable, documentable" goals on the IEP next school year.[/i]

I mean, that's one of the 'perks', right? [/b]

It's a built in perk, yes, for an IEP. In some ways I wish that Mariah's 504 plan had specific goals. [i] It could. [/i] There's no reason why it couldn't. My 504 plan states will occur. If something that is stated in the plan doesn't occur, then the school is in violation and there is a pathway to follow. So I suppose everything stated in a 504 plan is a goal for 100% compliance.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] So I suppose everything stated in a 504 plan is a goal for 100% compliance.[/b]

for my IEP, I like to know if they are meeting it. I like the idea that our districts IEP's are designed with this specifically in mind. I mean, other than a lack of being told when they aren't. KWIM?

And if they are not, to routinely and as necessary re-evaluate in order to determine a successful strategy or just document an unsuccessful one. And examine why. Although "incident reports" have their place, trying to enforce or expect 100% compliance from something that isn't working is dicey. I need to know it's not working and why. I mean, set a "100% goal when appropriate, but routinely measure progress. If there are red flags, show me.

Currently, the goal is written into each accommodation.

ie: "(student name) will participate in birthdays, celebrations, activities, lessons, specials, and extracurricular activities with his peers. He will not be segregated due to his Life Threatening Food Allergy."

It is then described how this will be accomplished. Hey, it's not without glitches. I can't say there haven't been [i]unforseen[/i] events that didn't result in less than 100% compliance. But I need to know when that happens.

Not as advice for anyone else, but just personally wrt to my cub's IEP:

"S___ happens. Think critically when it does. Don't be a slave to the plan."

Ok, bus service. My oldest does not ride the "big bus". He takes the "little bus". It picks him up in the driveway. There's on any given day, no more than four children riding it. He sits within view of the bus driver. Sure, I could insist on an "aide" to ride with him on the big bus, probably 70+ children and one adult, but pick your poison, either has a "stigma" attached to it [i]for some people[/i].

Not so sure about how some other [i]peers[/i] might regard additional "security" on the bus. Who knows, some might even like it. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img] But that's assuming they wouldn't be assigned specifically to my cub. Even tho our buses have videotape on board. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

I personally like the "little bus" too. I've discussed the "big bus" with my son for next year, but I'm not so sure he's interested. I mean, he's been on it before......

I mean, I'd have to go back and read your update on the whole "Missouri bus PA incident" to assist me comprehending this.

No advice, just personally. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

[This message has been edited by MommaBear (edited February 01, 2006).]

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] What "criteria" or hard data would you use, MommaBear, that would support a OHI designation for a PA child who is doing well academically in school? [/b]

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b]What "criteria" or hard data would you use, MommaBear, that would support a OHI designation for a PA child who is doing well academically in school? [/b]

Under what circumstances? With a 504 plan? I mean, should I use the argument:

What "criteria" or hard data would you use, GailW, that would support an 504 designation for a PA child who is doing not having reactions in school who has an IHP?

do you see what I'm saying? [i]What is the Standard[/i]? And I don't mean grades. Grades are late in the game. Before that.

[i]The end doesn't justify the means.[/i]

But hey, I could be wrong. I've said before, I don't know if I'm understanding this right, but it seems hypocritical of folk to manuever around "labels" and seek the benefits of "disabled" if they despise the very premise they are founded upon.

I mean, small example: look at the number of "1:1" aides parents of food allergic children are *demanding* for their children [i]under 504[/i] and then proclaiming: "Lack of funds cannot be an excuse to deny services!"

Especially when I see the logic in what I see.

They want staff devoted to supervising lunch sacks, washing hands, cleaning desks, lunch menus revamped, etc.....but shy away from what I can logically see fits the situation. But maybe my logic is off.

Answer me. Is my logic off? To lump this logic: Does lack of safe access mean a school should prohibit attendance? Does lack of attendence indicate learning is affected. I mean, what is the expectation wrt: attendance? Level the playing field. Are we asking for least restrictive environment? Is a child who cannot attend school safely at a disadvantage wrt "learning" than a child who can?

No advice, not at all. With limited understanding, if any, I ask these questions and question my own logic.

And please, I feel I've already answered this several times and in many conversations. Maybe I don't understand your question. The circumstances you imply, I mean.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b]What "criteria" or hard data would you use, GailW, that would support an 504 designation for a PA child who is doing not having reactions in school who has an IHP? [/b]

Yes, that was my scenario. Mariah had an IHP and never experienced anaphylaxis at school.

I used a medical diagnosis provided by a board certified allergist that included laboratory testing and past history. That met the criteria/data as defined by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

On Feb 1, 2006

Gail. I've had an epiphany.

Hypothetically:

Hard data:

The criteria that if a child cannot attend school in safety, then a child cannot attend. Attendance is prohibited. And this affects learning [i]by default[/i]. It is a ramification.

The criteria that a child has a *right* to "safe access".

The criteria that a child has a *right* to safe access in the least restrictive environment.

The criteria that a child has a *right* to documentation of remedial intervention and services to accommodate these needs under the logical conclusion that [i]lack of access does affect learning[/i]. Or why does the Institution of Primary and Secondary Education exist? Hey, I'm under no obligation to prove such institutions necessary, but aren't they?

The criteria that a school has a *right* to access whatever resources are available to aide in the provision of these remedial interventions and services in order to promote the current and future establishment, monitoring, maintenance, and possible revision of such provisions for society in general.

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. Feel free to add. It's only a wild hypothetical guess.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] Yes, that was my scenario. Mariah had an IHP and never experienced anaphylaxis at school.

I used a medical diagnosis provided by a board certified allergist that included laboratory testing and past history. That met the criteria/data as defined by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.[/b]

Just because something meets the criteria/data from "Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973" does that necessarily mean it doesn't meet the criteria for IDEA?

In the reverse, I've heard that if one meets the criteria for IDEA, one meets the criteria for 504? Is this true?

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b] The criteria that a school has a *right* to access whatever resources are available to aide in the provision of these remedial interventions and services in order to promote the current and future establishment, monitoring, maintenance, and possible revision of such provisions for society in general.

[/b]

[i]and that they are OBLIGATED to.[/i]

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. Feel free to add. It's only a wild hypothetical guess.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: I can't think of a reason. If my school district would have offered me an IEP for her PA, I would have gladly accepted it. [b](BTW, my PA DD has an IEP for her learning disability and a 504 plan for her PA.)

[/b]

what do you think of this:

[url="http://www.504idea.org/504overview.html#IVA"]http://www.504idea.org/504overview.html#IVA[/url]

scroll down to:

[i]"IV. Border Issues

A. IDEA eligible students who also have 504 disabilities"[/i]

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. I do not guarantee the accuracy, currentness, or content of the link in this post.

On Feb 1, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] I think it's harder to make a case for OHI because (generally speaking) children with PA attending school don't have "record" of their "academic performance" adversely affected by their PA.

What "criteria" or hard data would you use, MommaBear, that would support a OHI designation for a PA child who is doing well academically in school?

[/b]

please read point 4. :

[url="http://www.listen-up.org/rights2/osep14.htm"]http://www.listen-up.org/rights2/osep14.htm[/url]

from

[b]UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICE[/b]

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. I do not guarantee the currentness, content, or accuracy of the link in this post.

On Feb 1, 2006

As I understand it, not only is my child afforded protection through the the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), but [b]also[/b] by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Do I understand correctly?

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b] If accommodations need to be made in order that my child be able to access learning and attend in safety, then what would be the appropriate designation? IEP or 504? I mean, why, in addition to IDEA was 504 created?

[/b]

Don't have much time, but a quick comment. MB, you've got it backwards. 504 was created [i]prior[/i] to IDEA. The focus was different. 504 is civil rights legislation - that's why there is no funding component associated with it. It's intent was to level the playing field and provide FAPE in LRE.

IDEA, on the other hand, as you know, does provide a funding component. So, from a pragmatic perspective, sometimes a school (faced with a situation where they might either support 504 or IDEA designation), might steer parents in a particular direction (i.e. IEP w/OHI designation under IDEA) in order to utilize federal funding.

So, IMHO, sometimes, it can be all about the money...

I don't have any experience in creating an IEP w/OHI, but I concur w/Gail's interpretation.

Passage sould have stated that accommodations can be written as the 504 plan or IEP and the IHP can then be added to it as an acccommodation.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Passage sould have stated that accommodations can be written as the 504 plan or IEP and the IHP can then be added to it as an acccommodation.[/B]

This answers my question perfectly...the passage is wrong. The wording is wrong. IHP can be ADDED to the 504 or IEP. Thank you Nutternomore. I will be fine with IEP or 504, whatever the school wants, but I refuse to let the school tell me that IHP is enough.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: To restate:

[i]"Many districts consider the IHP to be a 504 Plan in the cases where a student needs only the health-related accommodations outlined in the IHP to access education. The IHP then, is subject to the regulations of Section 504."[/i]

I don't understand how they can state that and IHP is subject to the regulation of a 504, UNLESS it is incorporated into a 504, but standing alone it is not the same.

I wonder if what they mean is that the child has already been evaluated and found to be eligible for a 504 Designation. In that case, the passage makes sense. A child with a 504 Designation [i]could [/i]have an IHP alone that is raised to the standards that the 504 Designation requires.

[This message has been edited by Gail W (edited February 02, 2006).]

On Feb 2, 2006

Even if that is the case...it is raised to the standards of a 504...it still is not a 504 and does not have the legal weight for compliance.

I just don't think school nurses should think that IHP is enough when the allergy is life-threatning. I wonder if the same standard of care is followed with IHP as it is with 504? To me, it just seems that 504 will get more attention and more people will make sure the accommodations are followed.

My son is currently in preschool in public school. They are following an IHP...and it is a joke. Nobody seems to understand what is required to keep him safe. Right now every time an event comes up, I am calling the director to change things in order for my son to be safe. I didn't push the 504 because he is only there a few hours a week and I have been able to keep a good handle on it by just asking questions and being present on a daily basis (drop off and pick up). However in Kindergarten, I do not want to have to go into the classroom every day to find out what the plan is. I want to put more of the responsibility on the school. KWIM?

In my mind I have to make sure I understand why I believe a IHP is not enough so that when the school fights the 504 designation (which I have reason to believe they will), I can explain why I feel it is necessary.

Thanks all of you for the great replies, it has really help me sort a lot of this out in my mind.

Donna

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Nutternomore: [b] Don't have much time, but a quick comment. MB, you've got it backwards. 504 was created [i]prior[/i] to IDEA. The focus was different. 504 is civil rights legislation - that's why there is no funding component associated with it. It's intent was to level the playing field and provide FAPE in LRE.

IDEA, on the other hand, as you know, does provide a funding component. So, from a pragmatic perspective, sometimes a school (faced with a situation where they might either support 504 or IDEA designation), might steer parents in a particular direction (i.e. IEP w/OHI designation under IDEA) in order to utilize federal funding.

So, IMHO, sometimes, it can be all about the money...

[/b]

if 504 affords what IDEA does, then [i]why didn't they just add federal funding to 504?[/i] [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]

I'll have to find the link but when I was reading comparisons between IDEA and 504, I found the word "recommendations...recommended" used quite a few times in describing requirements related to things like: "due process" and "Procedural Safeguards" in relation to 504. And many times, [i]suggesting use of[/i] Procedural Safeguards and Due Process delineations from [i]IDEA[/i]. Seems odd to me that something one created *before* IDEA would use IDEA as a [i]suggestion[/i]. Especially, if a 504 supposedly is the way to go on something. KWIM? Seems odd, that's all.

don't know about you, but I'm a little burnt from the use of the word "recommendation" in conjunction with the "Wellness Policy/Nutrition Reauthorization" thing. Are you?

"It's all about the money." (????)

Again, it's my undestanding, and I could be wrong, but if one qualified for [i]either[/i] (and by qualifying for IDEA, one supposedly *would* qualify for 504 by default) then one is [i]obligated[/i] (as I understand if school districts understand the law) to take IDEA. I suspect in part in order to prevent others from sucking up resources and the potential breakdown of the system. (While, of course, funds from State schools systems get sent back unused every year and parents complain their school doesn't have enough X,Y,Z and their school doesn't have a nurse). [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

*and* complain their school tries to use "lack of funds" as an excuse.

It's my [i]obligation[/i] to point out (teach awareness??) regarding where and when my school can get "money" from in order to accomodate my child. Especially when it's my child. Especially. So I don't jam the next guy. My cub is not the only fish in the sea. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img] Pacific or Atlantic.

To me, if one even *likes* the idea of a school nurse (among sooooo many other things) around when their child is in school, it indicates a burden of obligation. But I could be soooooooo wrong. and not understand.

smacks of something but I don't need to say that. I mean, is this a walking on the "paved way" issue in some instances?

And we know where I stand on the "learning affected" issue. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img]

No advice, I'm ranting.

On Feb 2, 2006

BTW, Gail, again, what became of your request for "Procedural Safeguards"? Is anything nailed down? Set in stone? Has *your* school adopted anything as a "Policy"? (for 504)

I'd have to look adn see if IDEA "Procedural Safeguards" are uniform from School to school, but I *do* know that *my* school district gives me over 15+ pages each and every time we formally make a move. They are very clear. Very comprehensive. Clear. No guesswork. [i]I can do that.[/i] [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] Especially when I feel I'm on a winning side. Right, I mean. And "formal" is used a lot.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]Even if that is the case...it is raised to the standards of a 504...it still is not a 504 and does not have the legal weight for compliance.[/b]

I disagree. If a child has a Section 504 Designation and the IHP is an accommodation, the IHP holds the "legal weight for compliance".

This is exactly what I went through in the situation I posted about my DD's 504 plan being violated with the lunch study session. The violation of food in the classroom is part of the IHP, but because the IHP is an accommodation/component of DD's 504 plan, [i] it was the 504 plan that was violated[/i], and I was able to exercise my right (under 504) for the 504 Team to reconvene.

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]I just don't think school nurses should think that IHP is enough when the allergy is life-threatning. I wonder if the same standard of care is followed with IHP as it is with 504? To me, it just seems that 504 will get more attention and more people will make sure the accommodations are followed.

My son is currently in preschool in public school. They are following an IHP...and it is a joke. Nobody seems to understand what is required to keep him safe. Right now every time an event comes up, I am calling the director to change things in order for my son to be safe. I didn't push the 504 because he is only there a few hours a week and I have been able to keep a good handle on it by just asking questions and being present on a daily basis (drop off and pick up). However in Kindergarten, I do not want to have to go into the classroom every day to find out what the plan is. I want to put more of the responsibility on the school. KWIM?[/b]

Yes I do KWYM. Completely. Our situations are nearly identical. It's a different mind-set, and a different chain of authority. You want BOTH the protection that the school RN brings to your child (nursing standards, state Nursing Practice Acts, professional critical thinking, etc) PLUS the added disability protection that the 504-C brings for your child.

It blew me away to realize that without my DD having the 504 designation from the school, she did not have the protection of LRE. Can I say that again? [i]My daughter did not have a Least Restrictive Environment without a disability designation.[/i]

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]In my mind I have to make sure I understand why I believe a IHP is not enough so that when the school fights the 504 designation (which I have reason to believe they will), I can explain why I feel it is necessary.[/b]

I wouldn't even go down that path. I wouldn't explain. The reason you want a 504 designation for your child is because your child qualifies for it. Period.

You don't need to prove to them why the IHP isn't enough. Proving that the IHP works or doesn't work is not 'evaluation data' that the 504 Team should consider. I would argue that it is irrelevant, and that, if anything, the IHP shows that the need to make accommodations in the learning environment to ensure your child's safety has already been acknowledged by the SD with their creation of your child's IHP.

What I think would be better for you is to provide them with overwhelming 'data" and documentation that proves your child qualifies. Period. Have you seen our letter to the our 504 Team? I'll find it an link or raise.

Edited to link: [url="http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/001878.html"]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/Forum7/HTML/001878.html[/url]

[This message has been edited by Gail W (edited February 02, 2006).]

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: Again, it's my undestanding, and I could be wrong, but if one qualified for [i]either[/i] (and by qualifying for IDEA, one supposedly *would* qualify for 504 by default) then one is [i]obligated[/i] (as I understand if school districts understand the law) to take IDEA. I suspect in part in order to prevent others from [b]sucking up resources[/b]and the potential breakdown of the system. (While, of course, funds from State schools systems get sent back unused every year and parents complain their school doesn't have enough X,Y,Z and their school doesn't have a nurse). [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/tongue.gif[/img]

bold added.

while it's my limited understand supposedly a school cannot require "federal funds" directly for 504 accommodations...(and there may be grants for compliance with 504?) There seems to be a lot of (or some) "resource sharing". Unofficially. I could be wrong. Even from "special education students" to "regular education students". Case in point: My cubs 1:1 aide is used frequently to assist his "regular education" peers. As I understand it, this should not be. But I could be wrong. I'm being careful in my assumptions. I've been following up. [i]Delicately[/i]. And you know, yes, I resent that. After all I've went through, I'm still tiptoeing. What others do (or fail to do for their own children), [i]affects me[/i].

Which brings me to aides for 504 students. What pays for them?

My child was "out of district" and in a great part due to the need for a "full time school nurse" (RN). I mean, no matter what other needs could be filled somewhere else, there was no negotiating the need for a school nurse (RN) all day, every day, each day. In his building. I'm no betting woman, but I'd venture to guess documentation on the "funding side" (if it exists) reflected this need related to his IEP/IDEA/OHI. As I understand it, and from what was actively and openly discussed in front of me at IEP meetings, there was [i]accountability[/i] for funds, dollars, etc.....juggled from *my district* to the *out of district*. Who was paying for what, when, and where. My tax dollars were *still* being used to pay for my cub. Even out of district. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

This year, by some [i]miracle[/i] [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/wink.gif[/img] he was switched to a school "in district" that [i]suddenly[/i] had an RN each day, every day, all day (and now even after school for related activities my cub is involved in) as opposed to "sometimes".

Don't know who's paying for it. Don't really care. [i]I've done my part.[/i] In that regard. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img]

And that nurse is there for *everyone*. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img] Not just *my* cub. And I'm glad. [i]I'm ecstatic.[/i]

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. I could be wrong in my understandings. Individual Mileage May Vary. But I'm still ecstatic. [img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/biggrin.gif[/img]

[This message has been edited by MommaBear (edited February 02, 2006).]

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b]BTW, Gail, again, what became of your request for "Procedural Safeguards"? Is anything nailed down? Set in stone? Has *your* school adopted anything as a "Policy"? (for 504)

[/b]

[url="http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content3/ada.idea.html"]http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content3/ada.idea.html[/url]

under "Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973"

what do you think of the comparison between the two: 504 and IDEA wrt: [b]Procedural Safeguards[/b] and [b]Due Process[/b]. I won't go into "Funding to Implement Requirements"

Not sure if there were any changes for IDEA Reauthorization, but I mean, 504 hasn't changed.....am I correct? All I know, is the list of things I must be notified about and explaining/delineating requirements that protect my child seems to have gotten bigger. But hey, I could be wrong.

General Disclaimer: I am not offering advice in any manner or form. I do not guarantee the accuracy, currentness or content of the link in this post. IMMV.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by Gail W: [b] wouldn't even go down that path. I wouldn't explain. The reason you want a 504 designation for your child is because your child qualifies for it. Period. [/b]

This is how I feel about IDEA/OHI for *my* cub.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b]BTW, Gail, again, what became of your request for "Procedural Safeguards"? Is anything nailed down? Set in stone? Has *your* school adopted anything as a "Policy"? (for 504)[/b]

Yes. Six pages. Been meaning to post them but due to the length I haven't.

On Feb 2, 2006

Good ? MommaBear.

[b]Which brings me to aides for 504 students. What pays for them? [/b]

Any one know the answer to that ?

In light of the [b]No money in the 504 treasure chest?[/b]

------------------ Love this site Synthia

Oh My Yes. [b]Six pages. Been meaning to post them but due to the length I haven't.[/b]

When I started I only got [b] 1 page[/b]now we are up to 3 pages....I must be missing something?

[This message has been edited by synthia (edited February 02, 2006).]

[This message has been edited by synthia (edited February 02, 2006).]

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b] This is how I feel about IDEA/OHI for *my* cub.

[/b]

I understand, and I commend you. Truly.

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b]Gail. I've had an epiphany. Hypothetically:

Hard data:

The criteria that if a child cannot attend school in safety, then a child cannot attend. Attendance is prohibited. And this affects learning by default. It is a ramification.[/b]

I understand this too. You provided this epiphany for me a long time ago in your thinking post in your IEP vs. 504 thread. I get the theory that attendance is prohibited if the school environment isn't safe for your child to attend. And therefore learning is absolutely affected because your child can't safely attend school.

I get/got that. The difficulty that I see with that line of thinking, which I basically agree with, is finding the supporting "data".

You and I took different paths in our processes. You are/were willing to remove your child from the school setting. I wasn't. Mariah's attendance records don't support an IDEA designation. Her "academic performance" doesn't support an IDEA designation.

So................

[b]What "criteria" or hard data would you use, MommaBear, that would support a OHI designation for a PA child who is doing well academically in school?[/b]

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by synthia: [b]No money in the 504 treasure chest?[/b]

[i]there's a 504 treasure chest to begin with?[/i]

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by MommaBear: [b] [i]there's a 504 treasure chest to begin with?[/i]

[/b]

[img]http://uumor.pair.com/nutalle2/peanutallergy/smile.gif[/img] lol

Apparently so,If not *what entity is paying for aides*? With *only* a 504 DYUWIM

------------------ Love this site Synthia

On Feb 2, 2006

So if they insist on an IHP, then I should insist that it is integrated into the 504 plan as an accommodation.

That makes sense...that would then hold the same legal weight for compliance. Got it.

*I still think the original wording is incorrect*

"Many districts consider the IHP *TO BE* a 504 Plan in the cases where a student needs only the health-related accommodations outlined in the IHP to access education."

Caps added (still haven't figured out to bold something)

Donna

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]*I still think the original wording is incorrect*[/b]

Me too.

On Feb 2, 2006

Quote:

Originally posted by notnutty: [b]Caps added (still haven't figured out to bold something) [/b]

To bold something, put brackets around an upper case or lower case B in front of the beginning of what you want bolded. Like this, but without a space: [ b]

Then put a b in brackets with a backslash preceding it at the end of what you want bolded, like this but without a space: [ /b]

So if I am writing a sentence and want this portion to be bolded, I would write it like this:

So if I am writing a sentence and want [ b]this portion to be bolded, [ /b] I would.... but without the space in the brackets. (I needed to put the space in there or it would not show up in the post.)

Does that make sense?

[This message has been edited by Gail W (edited February 02, 2006).]

Related