NPS/RTC Guidance
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) ensures that all students with disabilities have access to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). The intent of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) is to meet the unique needs of a student in order to allow meaningful access to FAPE and prepare for post-secondary education, employment, and independent living. In some cases, a student may experience significant emotional, behavioral and/or academic challenges that impede access to educational benefit in the current program and setting. When this occurs, an IEP team must consider the full continuum of service and placement options to ensure meaningful access to FAPE based on the individualized needs of the student.
This handbook provides procedural guidance and considerations to IEP teams when considering a Non-Public School (NPS) and/or Residential Treatment Center (RTC) setting as the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) for a student.
There are several important distinctions between NPA and NPS services. NPS services, as referenced throughout this guide, refers to a student’s placement in a private school or facility, residential or non- residential, because an appropriate public school placement is not available. NPA services are not placements but Designated Instruction and Services (“DIS”) (“Related Services” under federal law) such as speech therapy, occupational therapy, counseling, ABA, transportation, etc. which assist a student in benefitting from his/her education. (34 C.F.R. § 300.34(a); Ed. Code §§ 56035 and 56363 (a).)
EARLY INTERVENTION: MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS
“MTSS encompasses the continuum of need, enabling schools to promote mental wellness for all students, identify and address problems before they escalate or become chronic, and provide increasingly intensive, data-driven services for individual students as needed.”
All schools must establish a system to identify a wide range of supports to address their students’ diverse needs. A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework is crucial for ensuring appropriate and timely attention to the range of challenges experienced by students. Schools must look closely at their systems to ensure that universal supports, targeted supports, and intensive supports are in place. This approach is critical for supporting students in the LRE. For more information related to tiered social-emotional supports within an MTSS framework, please refer to the EDCOE Charter SELPA ERMHS Program Guidelines.
PLACEMENT OPTIONS IN THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT (LRE)
The Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) mandate of the IDEA requires that students with dis- abilities receive their education in the “regular education environment” to the maximum extent appropriate or, to the extent such placement is not appropriate, in an environment with the least possible amount of segregation from the students’ non-disabled peers and community (34 CFR 300.114 through 34 CFR 300.120). LRE not only applies to instruction taking place in the classroom but also broadly to all aspects of a student’s special education program, as well as to students who are not educated in traditional settings (e.g., independent study or virtual pro- grams).
The continuum of alternative placements reflects a range of potential placements for which a Local Education Agency (LEA) can implement a student’s IEP. The continuum begins with the general education setting and continues to become more restrictive with each placement on the continuum (34 CFR 300.114).
The IDEA requires that each LEA ensure:
- To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are non-disabled; and
- Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal(s) of children with disabilities from the general education environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in the general education setting, with the use of supplementary aids and services, cannot be achieved
The corresponding image may assist the IEP team when considering the continuum of placement options to establish LRE for a student. It is essential that the IEP team makes data-informed decisions based on the individual student’s needs when determining the appropriate educational placement. The IEP team must consider various placement options and document these options on the Offer of FAPE Services Page of the IEP (see Appendix B).
UNILATERAL PLACEMENT
A unilateral placement occurs when a parent believes that their child’s current program has failed to provide FAPE and therefore places the child in a private placement where they believe FAPE can be achieved. This may occur either against the agreement of or unbeknownst to the IEP Team. The parent either notifies LEA/district of this unilateral placement at the last IEP meeting before the placement was made or via a letter 10 business days prior to the unilateral placement change.
For more information in responding to unilateral placements, please refer to the Unilateral Placement section in the Charter SELPA’s Procedural Guide.
IEP TEAM CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO NON-PUBLIC SCHOOL (NPS) PLACEMENT
(a) Specific educational placement means that unique combination of facilities, personnel, location or equipment necessary to provide instructional services to an individual with exceptional needs, as specified in the IEP, in any one or a combination of public, private, home and hospital, or residential settings. (b) The IEP team shall document its rationale for placement in other than the pupil’s school and classroom in which the pupil would other- wise attend if the pupil were not disabled. The documentation shall indicate why the pupil’s disability prevents his or her needs from being met in a less restrictive environment even with the use of supplementary aids and services. (EDC §3042)
If a student is not accessing FAPE in their current setting, the LEA has an obligation to convene an IEP team meeting to discuss the student’s identified needs and progress towards their current IEP goals. This may include initiating additional assessments to gain information about at student’s present levels of performance to drive identified needs, goals, and supplementary aids/supports/services. For more information regarding the referral process and NPS/RTC placement please refer to page 13 of this document. Such concerns may be related to safety, chronic attendance issues affiliated with the student’s disability, recent hospitalizations and/ or being at risk for suicide. For information addressing self-harm, suicide, and student re-entry after a mental- health-related hospitalization please refer to the EDCOE SELPA/Charter SELPA’s handbook, Suicide & Self-Harm: A Prevention & Response Toolkit for Educators.
The following considerations are designed to assist the IEP team in determining barriers to FAPE in the student’s current setting. These considerations are by no means exhaustive, nor should this list be utilized as a checklist of criteria to be met. It is at the discretion of the IEP team to determine what the primary factor(s) inhibiting a student’s access to FAPE may be.
NON-PUBLIC SCHOOL (NPS) CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO PLACEMENT
| General Considerations Prior to NPS Placement | Examples |
| School Refusal, Truancy, or Ongoing Attendance Issues | • Is the student’s disability interfering with their ability to attend school? • How long have attendance issues been prevalent? • Is there a pattern or known cause identified related to absences? • Does the student require transportation with/without corresponding supplementary aids and services (e.g., FBA/BIP, social work services, etc.) to access FAPE? • Is there support and structure in the home to mitigate the impact of the disability that results in absences? |
| Suspensions, Removals, Expulsions | • How many days of suspension has the student acquired? • Is the student being removed from the general education setting due to emotional difficulties and/or behavior? • Is there a history of manifestation determination meetings in the current or previous school year? • Has the student been recommended for expulsion? |
| Physical Aggression | • How long has physical aggression been occurring? • Has the underlying need (or function) of physical aggression been identified? If yes, is this need identified in the student’s current IEP? • Does the student have a current FBA/BIP to address the underlying needs affiliated with the aggressive behaviors? If yes, has the IEP/BIP been implemented with fidelity? • What is the severity of harm that has occurred resulting from physical aggression? • How frequent are aggressive behaviors occurring? • Are staff equipped to manage aggressive behaviors? • Could aggressive behavior be addressed through additional staff training? |
| Atypical Behaviors *atypical refers to behaviors that are unusual or unexpected | • Has the student demonstrated atypical emotional, physical, sexual acting out, or substance abuse issues? • Are atypical behaviors occurring that exceed the expertise of our staff? • Does the student require 24/7 monitoring to manage atypical behaviors? |
| Safety Concerns to Self or Others | • Is this student currently presenting a danger to themselves or others? • Is there a history of suicidal ideation and/or suicide attempts? |
| Hospitalizations | • Is there a history of hospitalization(s) that have interfered with access to FAPE? • Is there a history of hospitalization(s) related to danger to self/others? • What recommendation(s) have been made upon discharge? • Is there a current recommendation of history of recommendation(s) for alternative placement? |
| Home Environment | • Is the student safe in their home environment? • Is the student exhibiting emotional and/or behavioral difficulties outside of school? • Are there community supports or agencies that would provide additional support? • Do parents have the support required to support the student’s needs in order to attend school? |
| Mental Health/ Educationally Related Mental Health Services (ERMHS) | • Is the student receiving ERMHS? • Are social-emotional goals based on a recent ERMHS assessment? • What level (duration/frequency) of mental health services is the student currently receiving? • Does the student require daily ERMHS? • What level of progress has been made towards ERMHS goals? • Has the student demonstrated an ability to generalize ERMHS skills outside of counseling sessions? • Is there a high level of mental health related services being provided that are interfering with the student’s ability to attend school? |
| Medical Health | • Is there a medical issue that cannot be monitored on a comprehensive school campus? • Does the level of medication the student is prescribed require monitoring throughout the school day? • Does the prescribed level of medication result in side effects that interfere with learning? • Does the student demonstrate noncompliance with prescribed medication? |
| Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) Implementation and Fidelity | • How long has the student’s BIP been implemented? • Is the BIP addressing current behavior(s) that have been identified to impede learning? • Is the BIP based on a Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA)? • Does a pre-existing BIP require a new FBA? • Are there appropriate services to support the successful implementation of the BIP (e.g., teaching strategies)? • Is additional staff training required to successfully implement the current BIP? |
| Student’s Grades and Progress on IEP Goals | • What level of academic proficiency is this student currently demonstrating? • Is this student currently making progress towards their goals? • Are there any additional services that would support progress towards goals and increase academic proficiency in the current setting? |
| Student’s Response to Maximized Supports in the Current Placement | • Are there any additional areas of need that have not been addressed? • Is the student currently receiving services to support all identified areas of need? • Does the student have ERMHS services and a BIP? If yes, is the current duration/frequency of ERMHS adequate (see Mental Health/ERMHS considerations in the mage above) and has the BIP been implemented with fidelity (see FBA/BIP considerations in the image above)? • How long have supports been in place and have they been provided with fidelity? • What percentage of time is the student participating in the general education setting? • Would the student’s needs be addressed through increased small group and/or one-on-one intensive interventions in their current setting? |
The considerations above are an integral part of the referral and placement determination processes. After discussing the considerations aligned with the unique needs of the student, the IEP team must determine whether all needs can be appropriately met in the student’s current setting, whether additional assessment is required, or whether existing data justifies an alternative placement.
NPS placements can be complex and require careful deliberation amongst the IEP team. When considering NPS/RTC placement, a Program Specialist from the EDCOE Charter SELPA must be contacted to provide additional programmatic guidance. Please note: the EDCOE Charter SELPA Program Specialist may only provide programmatic support and is not a decision-making member of the IEP team.
Residential placements are considered highly restrictive, therefore the IEP team must care- fully consider all options within the LRE continuum as part of a discussion regarding resi- dential placement. However, in instances when a student requires residential placement to receive educational benefit, a district must provide a residential placement at no cost to the parents 34 CFR 300.104.
In addition to the factors listed when considering NPS placement, the following factors should also be considered for potential Residential Treatment Center (RTC) placements:
RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTER (RTC) CONSIDERATIONS PRIOR TO PLACEMENT
Educational needs and emotional needs are “inextricably intertwined” and residential care is necessary to provide special education and related services to a child with a disability (34 CFR 300.104).
| Student Requires 24/7 Support to Access FAPE | Student Safety | Student’s Response to Maximized Supports in the Current Placement |
| • The student’s needs require an educational program that consists of basic living skills so that habilitation and education are synonymous. • The student will regress and lose acquired skills without 24- hour support. • There has been an outside agency, or professional recommendation for residential treatment. • Direct assessments support a residential treatment placement. • The student experiences significant difficulty attending school which has interfered with their ability to make progress. | • The student has been hospitalized, either on an inpatient or outpatient basis, to address mental health needs. • The student is a flight risk from school. • The student presents a risk of harm to self or others, if not supervised and monitored 24 hours-a-day. | • The LEA has attempted to implement the student’s program with supplemental aids/supports and services (e.g., ERMHS, wraparound services, social work, behavior intervention plan, etc.) yielding minimal educational benefit to the student. • Minimal progress made in a counseling enriched program. • Attendance problems are related to the needs affiliated with the student’s disability and intensive interventions have been documented and exhausted in the current setting. |
These considerations are by no means exhaustive, nor should this list be utilized as a checklist of criteria to be met.
RTC placements can be complex and require careful deliberation amongst the IEP team. When considering NPS/RTC placement, a Program Specialist from the EDCOE Charter SELPA must be contacted to provide additional programmatic guidance as needed. Please note: the EDCOE Charter SELPA Program Specialist provides programmatic support and is not a decision-making member of the IEP team.
NON-PUBLIC SCHOOL (NPS) AND RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTER (RTC) PLACEMENT PROCEDURES
Any person involved with a student’s IEP team may suggest NPS/RTC placement. However, it is the responsibility of the IEP team to determine whether the student requires NPS/RTC as part of FAPE. If any member of the IEP team becomes aware of a request for an NPS/RTC placement, the LEA must hold an IEP as soon as possible, but no later than thirty days following the date from which a need for a change of placement was suspected. When an NPS/RTC placement is being considered, the LEA shall reach out to their EDCOE Charter SELPA Program Specialist to discuss placement considerations and procedures. The following graphic outlines the process for considering and offering an NPS/RTC placement: