Presenter Notes

• Hidden slides are included as background for the presenter and can be included in the presentation at the discretion of the presenter.
• Slides contain presenter notes, to help convey the flow and information to be shared.
• Supplemental Handouts
• Agenda
• Administrator Checklist
• Handout Packet
• Administrator Guide to the EBR

​

�Special Education Director Intro: Initial Consultation and Planning for an EBR Review

​

​

​

EDUCATIONAL BENEFIT REVIEW (EBR)

​

​

​

​

Agenda for Today’s Meeting

3

EBR Planning

�Educational Benefit Review (EBR)�

Individual Student Level

• Systematic approach to review a student’s IEPs to determine whether the design of the IEPs was reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit across (typically) three years of consecutive IEPs.

System Level

• Process to assist a district/LEA to systemically evaluate the special education services offered with the intent to use the information to improve practices and outcomes for students with exceptionalities.

4

Benefits of the EBR

• Deeper examination of the supports and services a district/LEA provides that result in a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) for students with IEPs
• Assist educators to examine and identify characteristics of IEPs that increase student access, participation, and progress in general education

• Use of the process to achieve
• A more collaborative approach to IEP development
• Enhanced understanding of how the IEP components should align and connect
• Moving from a focus on compliance to quality across the system

​

5

JODI – please format this slide. ☺

Goals of the EBR Process

6

Uses for an Educational Benefit Review

7

Jodi, can you align the left boxes with the right boxes? (Note esp the Assist line – but maybe check them all)

Guiding Concepts

FOR THE EDUCATIONAL BENEFIT REVIEW

Specially Designed Instruction is …�

• Changes in content, methodology, and/or delivery of instruction that
• are tailored to the needs in the IEP’s present levels;
• are linked directly to the goals; and
• address the unique needs of the student’s exceptionality.
• Systematic, explicit, direct, planned, and closely monitored instruction

​

9

KSDE, 2017

Specially Designed Instruction is…�

• Provided by a special education teacher/provider with specific skills
• Designed to provide curricular access to student, as well as to reduce or close gap in student’s skills
• More than accommodations that are available to all students

​

​

​

​

10

KSDE, 2017

Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) �34 CFR §300.17

Free appropriate public education or FAPE means special education and related services that—

• (a) Are provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge;
• (b) Meet the standards of the SEA, including the requirements of this part;
• (c) Include an appropriate preschool, elementary school, or secondary school education in the State involved; and
• (d) Are provided in conformity with an individualized education program (IEP) that meets the requirements of §§300.320 through 300.324.
• (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(9))

​

11

Rowley (1982) �Standard for FAPE�

​

The Rowley “Two-Prong Test” 

• Has the Board/State complied with the procedural requirements of IDEA? (Procedural Prong) AND
• Is the IEP developed through IDEA’s procedures reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefit? (Substantive Prong)

​

• Board of Educ. v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982)

12

Endrew F. (2017) �Standard for FAPE�

The standard established by the Endrew F. case built on the Rowley substantive prong, setting a single standard for educational benefit:

“progress appropriate in light of a child’s unique circumstances.”

​

Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1, 137 S. Ct. 988

​

13

��Endrew F. (2017) �Standard for FAPE�

Key Holdings

• “every child should have the chance to meet challenging objectives” 
• “adequacy of a given IEP turns on the unique circumstances of the child for whom it was created”

​

14

Endrew F. (2017) Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1, 137 S. Ct. 988

How does this Standard Apply to EBR?

​

The EBR Process is about whether a district/LEA is

“… able to offer a cogent and responsive explanation for their decisions that shows the IEP is reasonably calculated to enable the child to make progress in light of his circumstances…”

15

• Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District Re-1, 137 S. Ct. 988

Image from Redbubble.com

​

What are your goals for the EBR?

​

​

Leader Question

EBR TA Process

1. Initial Meeting with Director (30 - 45 min.)
2. Meeting with Planning Team (45 - 60 min.) Meet with Director or designee and district team facilitators to provide district team facilitators an overview of purpose, their role, and sample walkthrough.
3. EBR Team Process (3 - 4 hours) full EBR team process
4. Next Steps/Action Planning (60 min.) Meet with Director and others the Director would like to include for a review of the recommendations and development of next steps/planning.

The EBR Process

INSIGHT, IMPACT, ACTION

Framework for the EBR Process

​

• What (Insight)

​

• So What (Impact)

​

• Now What (Action)

19

�EBR Teams Planning

Team(s) of 4-6 members should include the following roles:

• Facilitator
• Special education teacher
• General education teacher
• District/LEA Representative
• Person familiar with district special education programs/services
• Other appropriate individuals

​

20

�Selecting IEP Sets Planning

• Pre-select an IEP set (three consecutive IEPs with accompanying progress reports) for each participating EBR team. Each team will review one student’s IEP set.

​

• Gather copies of IEP sets for teams to use during the EBR.

​

• Consider whether any information should be redacted prior to sharing with the teams.

​

21

Step 1

GATHERING IEP DATA FOR INSIGHT (What)

​

Chart a student’s IEP information within each year for present levels of performance, needs, goals, programming, services, supports, and goal progress.

​

Charting Each IEP

• Student’s needs (with baseline data) from PLAAFPs, including
• Needs related to participation in general education
• Post-secondary outcomes
• Disability-specific needs
• Goals (and objectives if available), accommodations, and modifications
• Services and placement
• Progress data from progress reports

​

23

Jodi, make bullets consistent w rest of PPT. ☺

Educational Benefit Review Chart for IEP #1, 2, or 3 (circle) Date of IEP____�Student ID _______________ Student Initials_____ Grade_____ Exceptionality____

24

Form 1

Charting/Recording

​

Option A: Facilitator (or recorder) charts input and information on large wall chart as team provides it verbally, and facilitator leads review discussion and analysis.

​

Option B: Each team member reviews one IEP and will add/summarize the content onto a large sheet of paper posted on the wall during the review meeting prior to full review team discussion lead by facilitator.

​

Option C: Wall/electronic charts are prepopulated with IEP information for each of the three years or completed IEP review charts are projected onto screen for team members to review and discuss together.

​

Jodi, I think the line spacing might be funky on this one.

Step 2

ANALYZING INFORMATION WITHIN EACH IEP: IMPACT (So What)

​

For each IEP, analyze the relationship between IEP components to determine if they are aligned, connected, and address all identified needs.

​

​

Teams Analyze the Relationships on Each Individual IEP

• The facilitator queries the team to examine the relationships between information charted for each IEP.
• Information that is connected is circled (use different color pen per subject area) and a line drawn between the information connected across columns.
• Unconnected information (e.g., a need without a service) could be designated with a question mark or empty circle and requires further discussion by team.

​

28

Step 3

ANALYZING INFORMATION ACROSS IEPS: IMPACT (So What)

​

Compare most current IEP with prior IEPs to analyze the relationship between IEPs, looking for alignment and connections. Determine if decisions made were based on progress or lack of progress on goals.

�Team Compares Relationships Across IEPs

• Facilitator queries team to determine relationships between IEP components across three consecutive years.
• One purpose of the year-to-year comparison is to establish if the following increased, decreased, or stayed the same:
• Student’s level of performance and need (PLAAFP & data)
• Student’s goals (and goal complexity)
• Student’s services, supplementary aids, accommodations, modifications, and time in general education
• Progress report data

​

​

​

34

Form 3

Step 4

ANALYZING EDUCATIONAL BENEFIT:

IMPACT (So What)

Team decides whether the most current IEP was reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit

Conclusion of Team Analysis: Educational Benefit

​

Using the data and analysis from the EBR Process for each student, the teams compare the current IEP to the prior two IEPs and provide overall opinions as to whether the student’s current IEP is reasonably calculated to enable the student to receive educational benefit – to make progress in light of his/her unique circumstances.

​

​

39

Step 5

Whole Group �Reflection and System Analysis: Action (Now What)

​

All teams come together to reflect on what they learned and identify important recommendations at both the individual student and system level.

������All Teams Come Together for System Analysis and Reflection at the…

• Student level
• Team member level
• System level

42

Next Step Recommendations

Examples

1. Individual student IEP adjustments that should be considered
2. Changes needed to district IEP procedures, policy, practice
3. Additional professional development in writing IEPs
4. Specific component(s) of the IEP that require targeted training, such as writing measurable goals, selecting goals based on appropriate skill progression, considering rate of learning in goals, or developing appropriate PLAAFPs with baseline data
5. Individual or targeted building level training needs
6. Potential revisions to IEP system format

​

​

44

Sample EBR Meeting Agenda – 3 hours

• 12:30 pm Overview of EBR Whole Group (15 min)
• 12:45 pm Step 1, Charting IEP Information (1 hour)
• 1:15 pm Step 2, Analyzing Information within each IEP (35 min)
• 1:50 pm Step 3, Analyzing Information across IEPs (30 min)
• 2:20 pm Step 4, Analyzing Educational Benefit (30 min)
• 2:50 pm Whole Group Reflection (40 min)
• 3:30 pm Closing

​

Sample EBR Meeting Agenda – 4 hours

• 8:00 am Overview of EBR Whole Group (30 min)
• 8:30 am Step 1, Charting IEP Information (1 hour)
• 9:30 am Step 2, Analyzing Information within each IEP (40 min)
• 10:10 am Step 3, Analyzing Information across IEPs (30 min)
• 10:40 am Step 4, Analyzing Educational Benefit (30 min)
• 11:10 am Whole Group Reflection (50 min)
• 12:00 pm Closing

​

Sample EBR Meeting Agenda – 6 hours

AM

• 9:00 - Overview of EBR Whole Group and group practice (1 hr)
• 10:00 - Step 1, Charting IEP Information (1.5 hour)
• 10:30 - Step 2, Analyzing Information within each IEP (45 min)
• 11:15 - Step 3, Analyzing Information across IEPs (30 min)

​

• PM
• 11:45 – Lunch
• 12:45 - Step 4, Analyzing Educational Benefit (1 hr)
• 1:45 – Break
• 2:00 - Whole Group Reflection and action planning (1 hr)
• 3:00 - Closing

​

Questions? �

1. What is your primary purpose for participating an the EBR?
2. How many teams will you need to include?
3. What IEPs will you target/sample for this process?
4. Who else do you need on your teams?
5. Who will be your team facilitators?
6. What agenda time frame works best for your purpose?
7. Where will you conduct the EBR?
8. When will facilitator training occur?
9. What method will teams use to chart information?

​

​

Leader Decisions

Jodi, yet another number and color option.

1. What will you communicate as the purpose of the EBR for teams?
2. How will you communicate the professionalism needed by teams as they dissect IEPs drafted by other professionals in your system?
3. What strategies will you use to ensure the insights, impact, and actions developed through the EBR process will be followed in your system?

Considerations

1. IEP sets/progress reports (each team needs copies of a different IEP set)
2. Colored markers, prepared chart paper, and tape or technology for charting and analyzing
3. EBR Participant Handouts

​

Materials Needed

Resources and References

KSDE. (2017). Considerations for specially designed instruction. Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE). https://www.ksde.org/Portals/0/SES/pubs/ConsiderationsForSpeciallyDesignedInstruction.pdf

Mearman, K. A. (2015). Educational benefit review process: A reflective process to examine the quality of IEPs. State Education Resource Center of Connecticut (SERC). https://ctserc.org/documents/news/2013-11-20-serc-edbenefit.pdf

NCSI. (2021). Fast five: Five questions answered about Educational Benefit Review. National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI). https://ncsi-library.wested.org/resources/738

​

Resources and References

Parent Network. (2021). Educational benefit review: IEP toolkit. https://www.matrixparents.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/IEP_Toolkit_02_Ed_Bene_Review_4.12.2021_ENG.pdf

PaTTAN. (2019). Education leader: Educational Benefit Review (EBR). Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network. https://www.pattan.net/CMSPages/GetAmazonFile.aspx?path=~%5Cpattan%5Cmedia%5Cmaterials%5Cpublications%5Cfiles%5Cldr-2-1-edbenrev-8-28-19wba.pdf&hash=c7c2e018119b484f1c47fde7157024dfecaa8a475e4a59e9f3b447b7bbcd86c4&ext=.pdf

​

THANK YOU

In closing, we would like to thank all of the states that have been engaged in this process for many years and who have paved the way for other states exploring this area. We adapted the content and materials in this training after reviewing the educational benefit review processes used in California, Connecticut, Mississippi, and Pennsylvania. We also thank the National Center for Systemic Improvement for the training and materials shared. We appreciate the work that has come before us!